Phil Graham on 5 Oct 2000 21:52:32 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] "Handbuch des oesterreichischen Rechtsextremismus" |
From Ruth Wodak Please circulate Phil ***** Hon. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Neugebauer Vienna, 21 September 2000 Scientific director, Documentation Centre of Austrian Resistance (DOeW) Information regarding Dr. Joerg Haider's law suits and the role of Haider's attorney, Federal Minister of Justice, Dr. Dieter Boehmdorfer, therein: 1) Law suits by Haider/Boehmdorfer against me among others 2) Active limitation of the unbiasedness of the courts 3) The relationship Haider-Boehmdorfer 4) Incompatibility of being a friend of Haider and Federal Minister of Justice (for example the case Andreas Moelzer) 1) regarding the law suits Haider/Boehmdorfer: In my role as director of the DOeW and as honorary professor for contemporary history at the University of Vienna I have engaged the question of right-wing extremism in Austria in various publications. On the basis of comprehensive research and analyses I have come to the conclusion that according to our criteria of definition the Freedom Party of Haider must be seen as right-wing extremist. Since the publication of the "Handbuch des oesterreichischen Rechtsextremismus" (Handbook of Austrian Right-Wing Extremism) in December 1993, Dr. Joerg Haider has initiated several court cases of criminal and civil law against me and the DOeW by way of his attorney (and personal confidant), Dr. Dieter Boehmdorfer. Last but not least, this was done in the intention of silencing a critic by financially hurting him. After Haider had lost some of these cases (for example, the verdict of the Supreme Court/Oberster Gerichtshof of 22 February 1996) and several counter-suits (due to the term "left-wing extremist"), a compromise was arranged in 1996 between Dr. Haider and myself, in which the reciprocal suits were revoked and a Gentlemen's Agreement was made for future confrontations on political and publishing bases instead of the courts. Dr. Haider broke this agreement, a non-binding directive, and in November 1999 initiated anew a law suit on the charge of "Ehrenbeleidigung" (insulting one's honour) by way of his attorney, Dr. Boehmdorfer, in which the terms "xenophobic", "right-wing extremist", FPOe is "responsible for Austria's Nazi-image abroad", and "antisemitic" were incriminated. This even though the Supreme Court of Austria (OGH) had already ruled in an earlier case, that the usage of the terms "xenophobic" and "right-wing extremist" are part of the freedom of opinion and freedom of science/scholarship. A negative end to this case that has been postponed to 24 October 2000 would mean that we would no longer be permitted to publish the "Handbuch des oesterreichischen Rechtsextremismus" which is at present in the stages of revising for the fourth edition. Similar cases are being fought against the president of the Jewish Community of Vienna (Israelitische Kultusgemeinde - IKG), Dr. Ariel Muzicant, Hans Rauscher, a journalist working for "Der Standard", and other media as well as against politicians of other political parties and even against comedians and artists. The potential ruling of this criticism in scholarship, publishing, art and politics as criminal acts would constitute a severe infraction of the freedom of opinion, art and science/scholarship in Austria. Would they not be protected by political immunity, even the representatives of the European Parliament, who formulated a critical and negative evaluation of the Haider FPOe, could be persecuted under Austrian criminal law. 2) regarding the limitation of the unbiasedness of the courts The independence of the courts is not only defined in Austria by the constitution, but also generally exists in practice, while this does not xclude, that in singular incidents party politics take an influence. In the case of the political scientist, Prof. Anton Pelinka, for example the proclamation by the primary instance (Landesgericht fuer Strafsachen Wien) that he was innocent was repealed by the appeals court (Oberlandesgericht, OGH Wien), a member of which was voted into the executive board (Kuratorium) of ORF (Austrian Federal Broadcasting Network) on request of the Freedom Party as a government representative. This man had already come to attention previously through questionable rulings in political criminal law suits (Mag. Ernest Maurer.) Since most likely the other pending court cases will be put before this senate of the OLG Wien, a similar ruling may be anticipated. These rulings, then, can no longer be fought in Austria, as an appeal to the OLG is not possible. The only remaining possibility is the very long path through the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. 3) regarding Minister of Justice, Boehmdorfer, as Haider attorney and confidant The current Minister of Justice, Dr. Dieter Boehmdorfer, has not only been Dr. Haider's attorney for many years, in which role he fought against Haider's political enemies in numerous cases, he also functions - I know this from experience - as a political employee and confidant of Dr. Haider. As such, Dr. Boehmdorfer invited me, for instance, in September 1993 both by telephone and in writing to a discussion with then federal party executive director, Dr. Joerg Haider, in the F-party club at the Hilton Hotel in Vienna. Among others, the current members of the government, Dr. Riess-Passer and Scheibner, also participated in this discussion. After this event, a still half-way amiable disputation, I received several letters from Dr. Boehmdorfer that were written in Dr. Haider's name, in which the participation of the FPOe in the board of the DoeW was out-right demanded. For several reasons (the German Nationalist basic worldview, Haider's pro-Nazi comments, court cases aginst the DOeW that had been instigated in the meantime) the board of the DoeW rejected this demand. In any case, this attempt of a political approximation to the DOeW has nothing to do with the mere activity as attorney; more so, Dr. Boehmdorfer fulfilled political demands of FPOe leader Dr. Haider. 4) regarding the incompatibility Haider employee/Federal Minister of Justice using the example of Andreas Moelzer Dr. Joerg Haider's law suits against me and others are being continued by the law office Boehmdorfer & Gheneff, in spite of the fact that Dr. Boehmdorfer was made Federal Minister of Justice. On letters filed by the law office a mere note states that Dr. Boehmdorfer's license as attorney is dormant for the duration of his engagement as Minister. Even though there is no formal misdemeanor, the change of circumstances may take an influence on justice. The potential incompatibility of the role as Minister of Justice and the former role as Freedom Party attorney and political employee of Haider is apparent in the case of the publisher and editor-in-chief of the journal, "Zur Zeit", Andreas Moelzer. Andreas Moelzer is himself a close collaborator of Dr. Haider (as for instance he is the deputee of cultural affairs of the provincial gouvernor of Carinthia, none other than Haider.) The DOeW filed a law suit against "Zur Zeit" at the state attorney's office in Vienna in June 1999 on the suspicion of "nationalsozialistische Wiederbetaetigung" (National Socialist "reactivation") In a review of a "revisionist" book the Holocaust had been denied (the impossibility of "mass gassings" in the National Socialist concentration camps.) As is evident from answers by Dr. Boehmdorfer to parliamentary inqueries, a legal pre-investigation was initiated against the author of the article, Hans Gamlich, however the investigation against the accountable editor-in-chief and publisher of the journal, Andreas Moelzer, was stopped on request by the office of the state attorney and with the knowledge and approval of the Federal Ministry of Justice. The bottom line is that a friend of Haider's, Dr. Boehmdorfer, is the one to make decisions regarding another friend of Haider's, Andreas Moelzer. Due to his right to give directives to the offices of the state attorneys, the Minister of Justice may at his discretion end any investigions against members of the FPOe and initiate investigations against opponents of the FPOe. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Opinions expressed in this email are my own unless otherwise stated. Phil Graham, Lecturer (Communication), Graduate School of Management University of Queensland, Ph: 617 3381 1083; Fax: 617 3381 1083; Mobile 0401 737 315; homepage: www.uq.edu.au/~uqpgraha -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold