[ad_1]
Could the attack in Vienna have been prevented? A commission of inquiry will now clarify this question.
Interior Minister Karl Nehammer (ÖVP) and Justice Minister Alma Zadić (Greens) presented the commission of inquiry into the terrorist attack in central Vienna on Thursday. Again and again new investigations and criticisms of the actions of the authorities emerged, now it is convenient to clarify whether the attack could have been prevented.
The author attempted to purchase ammunition in Slovakia on the day that LVT ceased observations. Based on the current state of knowledge, there was no reaction to subsequent warnings from Slovak officials. In addition, the terrorist gene had contact with extremists from Germany and Switzerland, whom he also met in Vienna. The judiciary was not informed of any of this. Eleven days after the attack, it is still unclear how the terrorist got to the scene or if there were accomplices.
Ingeborg Zerbes becomes head
On Wednesday it was finally confirmed that the perpetrator’s partner in Slovakia was the man whose mother had rented the rental car.
Who will head the U-Commission also leaked Wednesday. How “today“learned, the choice fell on criminal law professor Ingeborg Zerbes. She completed her habilitation on the subject of” reporting, spying, spying – breaking criminal procedural boundaries by secret access to communication “and spent eight years at the University of Bremen.
Partial result in four weeks
A first report must be available four weeks after starting work. It will investigate how the authorities reacted to the warnings and indications in the months leading up to the attack. The theme will also be the de-radicalization program and the assassin’s parole. Finally, a chronological report should provide a good overview.
confidentiality
This first report and the final report at the end of January should not be published. However, an adequate report will be attached to the first one “with special consideration to the obligations of confidentiality and data protection for its publication,” according to the government’s decision. Based on the legal requirements, it will be decided which parts of the report will be published and which will not.
Ingeborg Zerbes is supported by four other experts. The commission also includes former Attorney General Werner Pleischl, former Director General of Public Safety Herbert Anderl, University Professor of Constitutional and Administrative Law Franz Merli and former Munich Chief of Police Hubertus Andrä.
Criticism of independence
Zadić, Nehammer and President Zerbes always emphasize the independence of the commission. “This is the only way we can draw the correct conclusions,” says the Minister of Justice. Opposition parties, which see strong partisan political influence, see it completely differently. The deputy head of the SPÖ, Jörg Leichtfried, criticizes, for example, that the commission was occupied by the government alone and without parliamentary participation.
NEOS advocacy spokesman Douglas Hoyos also makes a dire prognosis. A “commission created by the government, which has members, some of whom have former high-ranking officials with clear party affiliations, and which must only report to the ministries for investigation, cannot be independent.”
Kickl as a scapegoat
The dispute between former government partners FPÖ and ÖVP is gaining momentum again right now. The FPÖ’s security spokesman, Hannes Amesbauer, is especially the appointment of the former director general of public security, Herbert Anderl, a thorn in the side. “Anderl is a man from the former Interior Minister (note: Ernst) Strasser, who was later convicted of corruption and was deeply involved in his black dye network,” Amesbauer said.
Interior Minister Nehammer had already responded to criticism of BVT by stating that former Interior Minister Herbert Kickl had “permanently damaged it (…), not to mention destroyed it.” In a 2018 broadcast, however, it was stated regarding the BVT: “The approach taken by the Minister of the Interior, Herbert Kickl, was of course coordinated and agreed with the new Popular Party.”
Despite all the official mishaps and mistakes leading up to the attack, Nehammer categorically ruled out a resignation, which would contradict his understanding of “political responsibility.”
