The proceedings concerned a suspected law purchase in connection with the Währing private clinic. Grubmüller had donated a total of 12,000 euros to the federal FPÖ for an unsolicited application by the then opposition party that was actually hopeless in parliamentary practice.
Strache was sentenced to 15 months in prison last year, Grubmüller to 12 months. The Vienna Higher Regional Court overturned the judgment. Criminal prosecution is an essential tool against corruption, the judge emphasized in her verdict on Tuesday. However, that does not change the fact that evidence must also be provided in such proceedings, since there is no other standard for corruption.
A verdict was actually expected at the end of last year, but the Office of the Public Prosecutor for Economic and Corruption (WKStA) quickly and surprisingly submitted further requests for evidence on the last day of the trial. The first witness to testify on Tuesday was the current Carinthian FPÖ chairman Erwin Angerer. He also described the parliamentary practice in the case of initiative motions. He could not say much about the background to the said initiative.
Witness “Without Memory of Specifics”
After Angerer, Peter Wurm was on the agenda as a witness. He too had signed the application and described how he had come to sign the application before the upcoming elections. He, too, “quite honestly could not remember this special story”, i.e. the PRIKRAF application. In terms of content, it was always a demand from the Freedom Party. Wurm couldn’t remember anything special either.
The last witness was not a Libertarian, but the SPÖ MP Christoph Matznetter. Grubmüller applied for it because he knows the clinic operator personally and has dealt with the PRIKRAF issue. According to his own statement, he also found the practice in the PRIKRAF as an economic chamber official strange and unfair. He got to know Grubmüller as a politically interested, sympathetic person.
WKStA: “No surefire evidence”
In his closing speech, the representative of the WKStA admitted that there was no “dead-proof evidence” that Strache might accept an advantage for the initiative application, but that was the nature of corrupt behavior, since contracts were almost never concluded. Despite critical objections from the Higher Regional Court, the prosecution continued to apply for a guilty verdict in the case of accepting an advantage. The initiative application of the FPÖ was a “political signal” to Grubmüller that his concerns were being taken care of. The chief public prosecutor himself showed understanding for Grubmüller’s concern, the situation in the PRIKRAF was clearly a grievance.
As expected, the defense attorneys for both defendants demanded acquittals. Chats would prove that Grubmüller was extremely politically interested, said his lawyer, who summed up: “These connections between the donation and Mr. Strache’s activities do not exist.” Rather, the motivation was Grubmüller’s frustration with the politics of the SPÖ and ÖVP.
Strache’s defense attorney took up the argument: The displeasure with other parties and the desire for change were the focus of the donation. In a chat between the two accused, which the Higher Regional Court also emphasized, it also says: “My campaign donation was out of conviction.” The initiative application did not lead to any improvement in Grubmüller’s position. The FPÖ is also not a party that is geared towards donors.
