In the APA summer interview, she generally recommends that parliamentarians create a better climate in such bodies in the future and that U-committees not hold criminal proceedings in parallel. As for the Freedom of Information Act, Edtstadler wants to “think everything through again”.
The assessment of the end of official secrecy expired several weeks ago. The Chancellery Minister justified the fact that no draft law had passed the Council of Ministers by saying that they wanted to take the time to consider the objections. Municipalities, states and ministries had warned of a wave of bureaucracy. She takes corresponding concerns “very seriously”, assured Edtstadler. It is about keeping the administration “functional” and still “ensuring advantages in the direction of more transparency”.
The head of department left it open whether there could still be restrictions here or whether the response period could be extended. The same applies to the objections of the Constitutional Court to the provision that would allow constitutional judges to publish a dissenting opinion. Here the arguments in the appraisal from both sides were essentially the same as in the run-up: “Ultimately, it will be a political consideration whether you do it.”
For the constitution minister, “not a small reform” is the new federal prosecutor as the new head of direction. For Edtstadler, a whole package is needed that strengthens the rights of the accused and brings higher remuneration if one is acquitted or the case is discontinued. She already has an opinion on the nature of the appointment of the federal prosecutor, but she does not want to make it known publicly.
NEOS: “Audacity”
For Edtstadler, it is important to get the polarization and politicization around the judiciary, which she sees with great concern, back under control. In doing so, she also addresses the U-Committee, which is met with great emotion from all sides. In their view, a change in the rules of procedure would be advisable, but this is the task of Parliament. In doing so, she recommends the MPs to engage in self-critical discussions. NEOS judiciary spokesman Johannes Margreiter called this audacious in a broadcast: “If someone politicizes the judiciary and has it in a stranglehold, hampers independent investigations with permanent disruptions and tries to discredit it with constant insubstantial attacks, then it is the ÖVP and the turquoise establishment around Chancellor Sebastian Kurz. “
Hafenecker: “completely wrong”
To the argument that a waiver of parallel investigations by the judiciary and parliament would postpone a U-Committee to St. Never’s Day, she counters that with the upcoming judicial reform the procedures should also become faster. The liberal parliamentary group leader in the U-Committee Christian Hafenecker called it “completely wrong” in a broadcast. Chancellor Sebastian Kurz (ÖVP) would probably not even resign if he was convicted. Therefore, parliamentary education is needed in parallel to political education.
Publication of files “strange”
If a committee is carried out like an “inquisitional procedure”, it is neither good for parliamentary control nor for the judiciary, says the minister. Edtstadler finds it strange when – as recently happened by NEOS – classified files are played out to the public with the argument that you decide yourself what needs to get out. Something like that is “outside the dignity of a constitutional state”. This would reduce the secrecy to absurdity. Edtstadler thinks higher fines are appropriate in such cases: “If there are no sanctions, then it is usually the case that one is not inclined to submit to them.”
No general vaccination requirement
Not only in the U-Committee, the ÖVP is not always of one mind with its coalition partner. This also applies to any preventive detention for asylum seekers who have committed criminal offenses until they can be deported. In view of the brutal death of a 13-year-old in Vienna, she does not consider this discussion to be over yet.
As far as Corona is concerned, Edtstadler emphasizes that there will be no general compulsory vaccination: “Our approach was always positive motivation.” If compulsory vaccination is prescribed in individual areas (as already implemented in health and educational institutions by federal states, note), this is legally possible for the constitution minister. So far there has been a need to be vaccinated against other diseases in some areas.