For Abuse of Office

Complaint Filed Against Walter Ruck and Michael Ludwig

Walter Ruck and Michael Ludwig never saw eye to eye, right up until the very end.(Bild: APA/ROLAND SCHLAGER)

About two weeks after Walter Ruck resigned as president of the Chamber of Commerce, the Vienna Public Prosecutor’s Office confirmed that a complaint alleging abuse of office had been filed against the former ÖVP politician. However, the complaint was filed not only against Ruck but also against Vienna’s SPÖ mayor, Michael Ludwig, who consistently stood by the disgraced Chamber president. 

First came the “Stelzen-Gate” scandal, then his expulsion from the ÖVP, and about two weeks ago, his “resignation” from the Chamber of Commerce. Now the case surrounding the disgraced Vienna Chamber of Commerce President Walter Ruck has reached the courts—and Vienna City Hall as well.

The Vienna Public Prosecutor’s Office confirmed to the “Krone” that a complaint has been filed for abuse of official authority—against former Chamber of Commerce President Walter Ruck and Mayor Michael Ludwig (SPÖ). Authorities are examining whether there is initial suspicion and who has jurisdiction.

Here’s what it was initially about
Criticism of Ruck has been mounting since the beginning of the year. In January, “Krone” and “Profil” revealed the Ruck family’s numerous careers within the Chamber. The starting point for “Stelzen-Gate” months later was a leaked transcript from 2025, which “Krone” and “Profil” obtained exclusively.

Walter Ruck and Michael Ludwig never saw eye to eye, right up until the end.(Bild: APA/ROLAND SCHLAGER)

In it, Ruck describes how he claims to have arranged for former ÖVP city council member Manfred Juraczka to become managing director of the Vienna Economic Agency—a plan discussed with Ludwig at the Schweizerhaus: “Hey, Michi, by the way, I’ve got someone.” It is precisely this backroom deal across party lines that now places both of them in the same legal case.

As is well known, the affair—complete with sexist remarks—first cost Ruck his party membership and then his office. Ludwig has so far been burdened only politically—now legal proceedings are added to that. Both have consistently denied the allegations. Ludwig also recently denied on Ö1 that he and Ruck belong to the same Masonic lodge. What began at the Schweizerhaus with a stelze is now a case before the district attorney’s office. Both are presumed innocent.

“Can you think of anything?”
The public prosecutor’s office is not providing any details about the content of the complaint. What could it be about? According to information from the “Krone,” statements made by Ruck regarding the new Meidling Trauma Center (formerly the Meidling Accident Hospital) could play a role. The former president of the Vienna Chamber of Commerce is said to have told a group of men that a city councilwoman had wanted to hold an architectural competition before the renovation began.

However, Ruck reportedly drafted a one-page memo because they could “make everything work” within the existing zoning designation at the time—just not quite as generously. He is said to have asked “Michi” (apparently Mayor Michael Ludwig, ed.): “Do you have any ideas?”

Ludwig then passed the matter on to a high-ranking city manager, who, according to Ruck’s account, in turn instructed another senior city official. After a month, everything was back on track. Furthermore, a delay of up to three years might have cost around 120 million euros.

The Ruck affair is increasingly weighing on Ludwig.(Bild: Martin A. Jöchl)

Dedications and an Ominous One-Pager
The City of Vienna stated regarding the events: “We are not aware of any one-page document.” In October 2020, the AUVA submitted a zoning application to MA 21A for the construction of a rehabilitation center on the property at Längenfeldgasse / Kerschensteinergasse.

Due to the scale of the project and its impact on the cityscape, City Hall reports that AUVA was then informed that an architectural competition was necessary.

The decision on the zoning procedure was finally made in September 2023. This means the entire process took three years. Consequently, it remains entirely unclear whether any misconduct occurred in this matter.