Reply to Blog

The judiciary at rock bottom

Michael Radasztics, Peter Pilz(Bild: APA/Helmut Fohringer, Kronen Zeitung/Gerhard Bartel)

The judiciary at rock bottom - this is the title of a piece written by the former editor-in-chief of the "Presse", Andreas Unterberger, as part of his regular online commentaries:

"A truly outrageous fact has been uncovered by the 'Kurier'. This puts all previously known activities of the Zadic judiciary far in the shade. In the events surrounding the disciplinary punishment for the double breach of duty by the Kurz judge Michael Radasztics, there is one aspect that makes the questions that have dominated so far almost marginal problems, namely whether this judge should not have declared himself biased in the Kurz trial and whether he should not have disclosed his disciplinary conviction in this regard, which was already legally binding at the beginning of the proceedings, when the Kurz defense lawyers requested that he be recused because of his close contacts with Peter Pilz. Now, at the latest, a thorough investigation and a high-ranking resignation in the judicial system are really urgent and due. For the first time in a long time, a parliamentary committee of inquiry would really be justified, in which a few players in this judicial system would have to testify under an obligation to tell the truth." (Text contains changes and has been shortened.)

The commentary, whose link could be found on krone.at, asserts the following, listing several points:

"1. According to the judgment, there was also an exchange between Radasztics and Pilz outside the ordinary witness examination. However, its content has never become known."

"2. Pilz even made a parliamentary inquiry on the basis of the information received from Radasztics."

In fact, there was no meeting and no "exchange" about the content of the criminal proceedings.

The parliamentary question was based on research prior to the interrogation of Pilz by prosecutor Radasztics on 20.12.2018; in the conversation, the prosecutor only reported on an instruction to reserve files, which Pilz already knew about. Peter Pilz has now written this to krone.at.

Furthermore, one could read in the commentary by Mr. Unterberger:

"9. According to - admittedly only confidential - statements by members of the judiciary, Pilz was a guest of Zadic in the ministry several times, although she had actually switched to another party."

Again, there was no meeting between Pilz and Justice Minister Zadic, as also stated in the letter sent by Peter Pilz to krone.at.