The Pilnacek Affair
Lawsuit Against Pilz: Up to 4.4 Million at Stake
Whistleblower Peter Pilz recently received an explosive lawsuit in the mail. Once again, it concerns the Pilnacek Affair. Federal Police Director Michael Takacs and other plaintiffs are defending themselves against the allegations. A great deal of money is at stake—millions, according to Pilz!
Kronen Zeitung als bevorzugte Google-Quelle hinzufügen Background: Christian Pilnacek, the once-powerful head of the Justice Section with strong ties to the ÖVP, was sidelined by Justice Minister Alma Zadic in February 2021. He was accused of influencing proceedings in favor of the ÖVP and of passing on sensitive information.
On October 20, 2023, Pilnacek’s body was found in a tributary of the Danube in the Wachau region following a previous incident in which he drove the wrong way while under the influence of alcohol. Numerous conspiracy theories still surround this mysterious death, both regarding the cause of death and the investigation. Pilz has documented all of this in two books, in which he leveled serious allegations against his current plaintiffs. The first volume had to be withdrawn from the market following a successful lawsuit filed by Takacs & Co.
Pilz Faces 43 Convictions
Now, a new lawsuit has been filed. A total of 25 publications on the subject of Pilnacek on the online platform “zackzack.at” and in the two books about the case are the subject of the lawsuit. Peter Pilz faces a total of 43 potential convictions. Takacs is suing over 13 of these publications; the remaining four lawsuits were filed by his subordinates. The Media Act provides for a maximum fine of 100,000 euros for each of these publications.
“We’re talking about up to 4.4 million euros—that’s 17 times our small company’s annual revenue. And there’s something else at stake: a serious attack on freedom of the press,” Pilz told the “Krone.”
43 times 100,000 equals 4.3 million. “On top of that, there are about 100,000 euros in court and legal fees. The plaintiffs want something in return, after all,” says Pilz. He is stunned that this constitutes a SLAPP suit—something the EU has long banned, yet the Minister of Justice is still not allowed to ban due to resistance from the ÖVP.
Maximum penalty unrealistic, according to attorney
When asked by the “Krone,” attorney Michael Rami contradicted this account. “That’s completely exaggerated. These sums are entirely unrealistic.” The 100,000 euros is an upper limit that is generally not reached. Pilz’s calculation is therefore a “theoretical, statutory maximum.”
Rami explains that the reason matters are being sued over that were already the subject of previous legal disputes is that, until now, only the publisher had been sued, but not Pilz personally. That is now the case.
Allegation of Defamation
Pilz is accused of defamation. The indictment states verbatim: “The defendant does not merely accuse the private prosecutors of errors or negligence in their police work; rather, he accuses them of deliberately obstructing the investigation into the death of Mag. Christian Pilanacek as part of a politically influenced chain of command, of withholding evidence from the investigation, of falsifying or manipulating the results of the investigation, and thereby of having concealed the actual cause of death in the interest of the ÖVP.”
This article has been automatically translated,
read the original article here.
Willkommen in unserer Community! Eingehende Beiträge werden geprüft und anschließend veröffentlicht. Bitte achten Sie auf Einhaltung unserer Netiquette und AGB. Für ausführliche Diskussionen steht Ihnen ebenso das krone.at-Forum zur Verfügung. Hier können Sie das Community-Team via unserer Melde- und Abhilfestelle kontaktieren.
Hinweis in eigener Sache: Das krone.at-Forum präsentiert sich ab sofort in neuem Design! Wir freuen uns über konstruktives Feedback. Damit die Diskussionen in den Kommentarbereichen beim jeweiligen Thema bleiben, können Sie uns Rückmeldungen hier hinterlassen.
User-Beiträge geben nicht notwendigerweise die Meinung des Betreibers/der Redaktion bzw. von Krone Multimedia (KMM) wieder. In diesem Sinne distanziert sich die Redaktion/der Betreiber von den Inhalten in diesem Diskussionsforum. KMM behält sich insbesondere vor, gegen geltendes Recht verstoßende, den guten Sitten oder der Netiquette widersprechende bzw. dem Ansehen von KMM zuwiderlaufende Beiträge zu löschen, diesbezüglichen Schadenersatz gegenüber dem betreffenden User geltend zu machen, die Nutzer-Daten zu Zwecken der Rechtsverfolgung zu verwenden und strafrechtlich relevante Beiträge zur Anzeige zu bringen (siehe auch AGB). Hier können Sie das Community-Team via unserer Melde- und Abhilfestelle kontaktieren.