Vodka-Red-Bull, a “shy Russian” and Heinz-Christian Strache, who offers half of Austria for sale: The short version of the legendary “Ibiza” video is known, the MP Stephanie Krisper knows all the rest since yesterday – but is allowed to don’t even talk openly about it with their colleagues.
For Krisper, the exaggerated caution is just another hurdle in the laborious process of coming to terms with the biggest political scandal in Austria since the Second World War. In an interview with n-tv.de she talks about the “unacceptable” secrecy, the police mishaps and frustrating gaps in the memory of Chancellor Sebastian Kurz.
n-tv.de: Many people would like to go to the cinema again during the pandemic, you were just allowed to watch a 7-hour film – and then also the film that you have been waiting for so long. Did the Ibiza Uncut version meet your expectations?
Stephanie Krisper has been a member of the Austrian parliament for the liberal Neos party since 2017. In the “Committee of Inquiry into the alleged marketability of the turquoise-blue federal government”, or “Ibiza Committee” for short, she heads the surveys for her party.
(Photo: picture alliance / dpa / APA)
–
Stephanie Krisper: Oh, it was worse than watching TV at home in every way. It’s work, but we are not allowed to write anything down. Not all employees are allowed to inspect, which makes work very difficult.
Oh dear Where was the performance – and were there at least comfortable armchairs?
I’m not saying where the room was – the Parliamentary Administration has tried very hard to find a bug-proof room, so I would be happy if it doesn’t get public. And I assure you: it was pure work. There is no tax money spent on cinema-style armchairs and popcorn.
We all know the teaser: Strache in a baggy shirt on the sofa, who offers himself to a rich Russian woman as “Red Bull brother from Austria”. Were the parts known so far all that you had to know about this evening in Ibiza? Or did you find out anything new in the full version?
Unfortunately, I can’t tell you anything about that. And we are only allowed to talk to the other members of parliament over the video in a tap-proof room.
I beg your pardon?
The video was classified with level 4, which is the highest level of security. This makes it difficult for us to access and work with the material – and if something were leaked about the content, we would find ourselves in the criminal area. Actually, such strict secrecy is envisaged if national security is in danger or if disclosure of the information would result in the immediate loss of numerous human lives.
Just so I get it right, you’ve seen the film but aren’t even allowed to talk about it in a committee meeting?
Yes, but only in a secure room. That will probably cause delays again. And that without need: Protecting personal rights is always a major concern for us – but a lower level of confidentiality would be sufficient for this. Therefore the current situation is unacceptable to us.
The “Special Tape Commission” found the USB stick with the file back in April of this year – why did it take you so long to see the film?
First of all, it is absurd that the Soko Tape would secure the video and not tell the Business and Corruption Prosecutor, who was the master of the proceedings. The Soko also omitted the obvious investigation step of asking the people around the alleged producer Julian H. to release the video. His lawyer in Berlin even said that he had handed over the video.
But again: The news about the find came out in May, that was eight months ago. Why is this taking so long?
This is sure to be attrition, like everything in committee. In addition, we are fighting to ensure that all raw data is transmitted to us. One of our topics is the possible political influence on the investigation – for that we need to know: Which videos did Soko secure, who can be seen on them, and was it objectively and efficiently investigated in all directions?
There are serious doubts not only about the investigation, but above all about the willingness of some of the informants on the committee to clarify. E-mails have only just emerged suggesting that two senior officials have lied to the committee. Both are still in office, why are there no consequences?
I have already reported informants to another investigative committee for false statements, from then Interior Minister Herbert Kickl downwards. Also because of contradictions with other witnesses, where it is clear: someone has to tell the untruth. But there were never any proceedings, not even an interrogation. I am skeptical that things will be different in this case. These are two people who are very important to the ÖVP.
Federal Chancellor Sebastian Kurz from the ÖVP also made a memorable appearance on the committee, where he simply could not or did not want to remember most things. His finance minister Gernot Blümel didn’t even know anymore whether he had a laptop. VIPs like René Benko or Kathrin Glock are noticeably covered. So the impression remains from the committee: the rich and powerful are dangerously close in Austria, they clang to their mutual benefit, but nothing can be proven to you – also because nobody wants to talk. Does that frustrate you?
Yeah, that’s frustrating. We often ask questions about the friendship economy, i.e. the fact that key players are also closely linked in their private lives. But there the chairman Wolfgang Sobotka of the ÖVP is motivated not to allow them with the reference to privacy. That makes our work harder, especially where it gets exciting. Besides, it’s not that easy: money against posts or money against the law. With an old party like the ÖVP it is more of an established system, the causalities of give and take are more complex and therefore more difficult to grasp. Especially when everyone is suddenly so forgetful.
You spoke to Chairman Sobotka – he created a curiosity: he had to change roles and testify in the committee. An association that he chairs and an orchestra that he directs have received money from the gaming group Novomatic, which is always the focus of the committee – “Novomatic pays everyone,” Strache said in Ibiza. Later, Sobotka openly talked on television about “consideration” for the payments. Why is a man like that still chairman of the committee?
Wolfgang Sobotka from the ÖVP is chairman of the Ibiza committee – although he had to testify there as a witness.
(Photo: picture alliance / dpa / APA)
–
Because we can’t carry him away. As President of the National Council, Sobotka is also the highest representative of parliament, and he of all people does not seem to care that he makes parliament and democracy appear manipulated and weakens them.
You, on the other hand, made headlines when you accidentally did not turn off your microphone in a questioning and said loudly and clearly “They go to me at Oasch, everyone” …
Please spare me this.
But I have the feeling that by doing this you have hit the mood for many Members of the Ibiza Committee. Is that saying still your conclusion on the committee?
It’s just getting worse and worse.
And how can it get better?
Rather not through the statements of respondents. If so, then only through the files and courageous whistleblowers.
Christian Bartlau spoke to Stephanie Krisper
– .
