-
Keystone
![Former Federal Councilor Christoph Blocher caused a stir in federal Berbers with his pension claim. Nobody wants to mess with the SVP-Doyen.]()
1/9
Former Federal Councilor Christoph Blocher caused a stir in federal Berbers with his pension claim. Nobody wants to mess with the SVP-Doyen.
—-
Keystone
![Before Blocher officially submitted his application, Federal Chancellor Walter Thurnherr had legal opinions drawn up.]()
2/9
Before Blocher officially submitted his application, Federal Chancellor Walter Thurnherr had legal opinions drawn up.
—-
Keystone
![One of them was from the employment lawyer Thomas Geiser.]()
3/9
One of them was from the employment lawyer Thomas Geiser.
—-
Keystone
![The Federal Council did not even have Blocher's actual income from the past 13 years checked.]()
8/9
The Federal Council did not even have Blocher’s actual income from the past 13 years checked.
—-
Keystone
![He is supposed to pay for the mess: CVP Council of States Peter Hegglin, head of Parliament's financial delegation.]()
9/9
He is supposed to pay for the mess: CVP Council of States Peter Hegglin, head of Parliament’s financial delegation.
—-
—-
The agenda for the last Federal Council meeting before the summer holidays was long. Corona is still the dominant theme. The confidential business was only a side note: the former SVP Federal Councilor Christoph Blocher (79) wanted to receive his retirement pension retrospectively.
–
The Federal Council waved the application through. Research now shows that Chancellor Walter Thurnherr (57, CVP) had already prepared the legal opinions, on the basis of which the entire Federal Council ultimately decided, even before Blocher officially made the application. Apparently, the Chancellor had been informed by the former SVP pioneer in spring. The expert reports ordered by Thurnherr should show whether the billionaire entrepreneur Blocher is entitled to a pension even though he had waived it for 13 years.
–
The reports were clear
The conclusion that can be drawn from the reports is clear: He has no claim to the almost 2.8 million francs Blocher requested. Professor Thomas Geiser even thought that Blocher was retrospectively entitled to no money at all. However, he made the basic assumption that Blocher had explicitly foregone his pension in the past – which is not true. This was Geiser’s report for the cat, according to various sources.
–
The second report came from Professor Ueli Kieser. He concluded that Blocher’s claims expire after five years. The old Federal Council therefore “only” benefited CHF 1.12 million. The Federal Office of Justice, which was later called in, also takes this view. BLICK research supports a corresponding report by “Daily display”.
–
Incomprehensible decision
The Federal Chancellery does not comment on why Thurnherr presented two variants to the Federal Council. One variant provided that Blocher only paid out the 1.12 million francs. The second: Blocher should get everything he demands – despite the expert opinion.
–
As is well known, the state government opted for the 2.77 million variant. Nobody understands why. Because if the Federal Council does not do what the experts advise it anyway, why did it raise money for several reports?
–
Observers disagree. One reason is likely: The magistrates probably also thought of themselves. Finally, you too can look forward to a substantial pension. Chancellor Thurnherr, too.
–
Blocher shouldn’t get a victim role
In addition, according to circles close to the Federal Council, everyone had the respect to mess with Blocher. It is said that they wanted to prevent him from going into the victim role and saying: “Look here – they throw the money out of the window with both hands, but they don’t give me what I’m legally entitled to.” Or else, you wanted to let the senior SVPler run into the knife. Because it was clear that Blocher’s demand was not well received by the public. And indeed: Even long-time SVP voters, disappointed by Blocher, turned away from the party.
–
The federal councils therefore shirked. They preferred to make decisions in Blocher’s sense – and passed the hot potato on to parliament. The financial delegation from the National Council and the Council of States (FinDel) should argue with Blocher.
–
Not even his income was checked
How nonchalantly the Federal Council spoke the millions for Blocher can already be seen from several sources by the fact that it did not even look at its tax documents. The government blindly trusted Blocher’s self-declaration that in none of the 13 years since his election had he earned so much that a pension cut would be appropriate.
–
Criticism that the pension for federal councilors is no longer up-to-date has been raised from time to time from various political directions. Especially from Blochers SVP. But now it turns out: The two SVP federal councilors Ueli Maurer (69) and Guy Parmelin (60) spoke in favor of the generous pension of their own party leader from Herrliberg ZH. If the state budget is to be opened for you from your own ranks, even the otherwise thrifty Minister of Finance Maurer is generous for once.
–
FinDel doesn’t want the hot potato
The ball is now at the FinDel, which will meet again at the end of August. But their members are not even sure if they are responsible. Or in plain language: They don’t even want to touch the potato at all.
–
If the FinDel takes its work seriously, it should come to the conclusion that Blocher is not entitled to the whole 2.77 million francs. But then the old Federal Council can go to court. Exit open.
–
Is a federal council not subject to the law?
The whole thing could also end up before the judge if Blocher were awarded the 2.77 million. Even then, a social security court could once deal with the cause. According to the Swiss Code of Obligations, the pension entitlement generally expires after five years. Should an exception apply to federal councilors? The opinions of legal scholars differ on this.
–
One thing is clear at the moment: thanks to Blocher and the Federal Council as a whole, pensions are back on the political agenda and in the public eye. It is quite possible that the Herrliberger dealt the death penalty with his retroactive claim.
—
Related posts:
The legendary skydiver Reffet died during trainingBill Gates Britain.. Who is Mike Lynch, the billionaire missing in Sicily - Youm7A 2-year-old boy drowns in a swimming pool in Ortigosa del Monte (Segovia)Saudi Arabia and America Express Concern and Call for Negotiated Solution Amid Sudanese Army and Rap...Related
