On the day of the publication, Chancellor Sebastian Kurz (ÖVP) informed him about the upcoming “Ibiza video”. Kurz’s call came before the release on May 17, 2019, the former minister said. He then made contact with “two key employees of the house”: General Secretary Christian Pilnacek and Moser’s then head of cabinet, Clemens-Wolfgang Niederist, who is now the cabinet head of Finance Minister Gernot Blümel (ÖVP). Otherwise no one was informed that the video had been waited for.
After seeing the video, the minister issued two instructions: firstly, that the image material must be obtained in order to examine the initial suspicion; on the other hand, that communication only takes place via the public prosecutor’s office (OStA) Vienna. These two instructions from the then head of department are basically the crux of the matter. Because, as only became known much later, Pilnacek wrote to the head of the OStA Vienna, Johann Fuchs, that Moser wanted to give the Economic and Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (WKStA) “no active role”.
Unanswered question about an email
It is not entirely clear what the context of “no active role” was. Some think it relates to external communication, others suspect that the investigation should be disrupted by slowing down the corruption prosecutor. After ÖVP mandate Martina Kaufmann had presented him with these e-mails, Moser said that he only found out about it in the course of the U-Committee. He confirmed that the WKStA should not initially play an “active role” in communicating the cause. The only intention was to speak with “one voice”.
Moser contradicted that the instruction, as suggested by an email from Pilnacek, was intended to thwart the investigation. “How can you not play an active role when examining an initial suspicion?” He asked. These two instructions were the only ones he had ever given. SPÖ parliamentary group leader Kai Jan Krainer then said with reference to files that were available that the instruction to obtain the material was only given “26 hours after the video appeared”. Moser replied: “You had to check that first.”
What Pilnacek meant by the text passage mentioned (“no active role”), you have to ask him, said the ex-minister. The parliamentary groups continued to disagree about what the now suspended section head meant by that. While the ÖVP thanked Moser for the “clarification” that the email referred to the communication of the investigation, the SPÖ said that was not the case. The parties stuck to their positions and defended them vehemently in the U-Committee.
“Inquiry” or “Initial Suspicion Check”?
NEOS parliamentary group leader Stephanie Krisper spoke again about the instructions in the course of the survey. Shortly after the video was published, OStA head Fuchs instructed the WKStA to inquire about an examination of the initial suspicion. Moser, on the other hand, he said, had issued instructions that the WKStA had to examine the initial suspicion. The ex-Justice Minister did not just want “inquiries”, as he emphasized. It was clear that the initial suspicion had to be examined.
The WKStA was the entire survey on topic. There were repeated reports in the media about any quarrels with the higher authorities. For example, a former cabinet employee of Moser had announced in the U-Committee that the ex-minister is said to have said: The WKStA “smash ma”. When asked about it, Moser said he ruled that out. A working group that was set up after the raid on the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and Counter-Terrorism (BVT) had to find out how to improve the quality of the proceedings and shorten the duration of the proceedings.
The relationship between the public prosecutor’s offices and the supervisory authorities had also been discussed. He did not assume that the WKStA was not part of the working group on quality improvement, said Moser: “I did not issue any directives in connection with the composition.” The head of the working group was then General Secretary Pilnacek. He couldn’t say why he didn’t invite the WKStA.
–
