Convicted Wöginger to run again for ÖAAB leadership – criticism grows in ÖVP
Despite a first-instance conviction for incitement to abuse of office, August Wöginger intends to remain ÖAAB chairman. This is causing growing discontent within the ÖVP.
Wöginger stays at ÖAAB helm despite verdict – party-internal criticism grows
August Wöginger, convicted at first instance of incitement to abuse of office, will stand again as chairman of the Austrian Employees and Salaried Workers Association (ÖAAB) on Saturday in Stadt Haag, Lower Austria. There is no opposing candidate. According to the Kurier, this surprises some in the ÖVP – it does not reflect the sense of wrongdoing that one would have expected.
On 4 May, Wöginger was convicted in the so-called Postenschacher trial – not yet final. Immediately after the verdict was announced, he resigned as ÖVP parliamentary group leader in the National Council. However, he retained his National Council mandate and his ÖAAB chairmanship.
Comparison with the Ruck case fuels the debate
Internal party criticism has been inflamed by the Walter Ruck affair. The Vienna Chamber of Commerce chief stumbled over secret tape recordings from his wine cellar. The ÖVP federal party reacted swiftly: after brief debate, it expelled Ruck from the party with immediate effect – even though his case did not even seem legally relevant at that time.
Voices soon emerged from the Economic Association, drawing parallels between the Ruck and Wöginger cases. Why, the question went, was Ruck dropped so quickly, but not Wöginger? Some grumbled internally that the guilty verdict against Wöginger was "significantly more damaging to the party".
Making matters worse is the fact that parts of the ÖAAB – particularly in Vienna – exploited the Ruck affair as leverage in the party-internal power struggle between sub-organisations and at times displayed this maliciously, according to the Economic Association. That Wöginger himself, as ÖAAB chairman on the federal party's board, voted in favour of Ruck's expulsion – the body voted unanimously for his removal – fits the picture for critics.
Edtstadler not running again
Salzburg's governor Karoline Edtstadler (ÖVP), hitherto Wöginger's deputy in the ÖAAB, also came into the focus of the economic wing. She is not running on Saturday. Her public statements in the Ruck affair – she had said Ruck had "no place in politics" – did not go over well internally with everyone. Edtstadler is also said to have argued within the federal party for a statutory reform disadvantageous to the Economic Association.
Specifically, this concerns a regulation allowing a functionary to remain a member of the Economic Association even after expulsion from the ÖVP. This should change, some are pushing – also to strengthen the position of party leader Christian Stocker. Stocker looked bad in the Ruck affair after Ruck simply ignored Stocker's demand for a justification.
ÖVP: cases not comparable
The ÖVP insists that the Ruck and Wöginger cases are not comparable. What Edtstadler had said about Ruck, many had thought: his statements and the image he conveyed were no longer tenable. That Wöginger is "not managing it well" with his renewed candidacy in light of the first-instance conviction is certainly clear – ultimately, however, it is "his decision", it is said.
Long legal proceedings expected
Criminal proceedings against Wöginger are still far from concluding. Wöginger and his two co-defendants, Siegfried M. and Herbert B., are still awaiting the written judgment that has been outstanding since the verdict on 4 May. Once it is issued, the defence lawyers can appeal.
According to the Kurier, Wöginger's defence is planning an additional application to the Constitutional Court (VfGH). This concerns a diversionary measure that was initially offered to Wöginger but was then withdrawn by the Court of Appeal. His lawyer Michael Rohregger argues this is unconstitutional because the person concerned had no right to speak in this proceeding. Had Wöginger been able to make a statement, the defence argument goes, the diversionary measure would have stood, the hearing at the regional court would never have continued, and no verdict would have been issued – it should therefore be quashed.
It could take a good year for the Constitutional Court to decide. Only then does the proceeding continue at second instance. At the earliest, 2028 could establish whether the guilty verdict is quashed, upheld, or the proceeding reopened. The next National Council elections are in 2029.
Source: Kurier