The trial against the former head of espionage at the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and Combating Terrorism (BVT) ended on Thursday afternoon with acquittals. The main defendant, who was accused of illegally monitoring delegations from North Korea, was acquitted of all charges, as was his father-in-law and another official from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. The judgment is not final.
The last day of the hearing was largely closed to the public due to the explosive nature of the matter. The process is a remnant of the BVT affair, which produced a parliamentary committee of inquiry but had no judicial aftermath. During the course of the trial, the defense also accused the WKStA that the allegations against the former spy chief were by no means based on “accidental finds” during the house search at the time, but that the prosecution had specifically searched for them.
The main issue in the process was the lack of reports from the two BVT officials to the legal protection officer. Judge Christoph Zonsics-Kral stated in his verdict that there were “no clear regulations” in the decree. This is comparable to covering up an X-ray, showing it to a doctor and then wanting a report. Apart from that, all witnesses would have shown the most varied versions of the manner in which these reports should be made. There was “no clarity” and one could determine “quite chaotic conditions”, explained the judge. “The motive, the intent and the subjective side of the crime could not be determined in case of doubt.” The information provided by the accused was “true to life and credible”.
The main defendant was accused of illegally monitoring delegations from North Korea. He argued that monitoring the North Korean delegation was necessary because North Korean groups posed a threat per se. The Economic and Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (WKStA) accused the man of abuse of office. It was also about whether he had informed the legal protection officer in the BVT about the process. In addition to the former head of espionage, a former BVT group leader, who also had to answer for the failure to report to the legal protection officer, was also on trial.
The accused’s father-in-law, who heads a small party, was accused of attempting to abuse his office. He is said to have asked his son-in-law to check the data of a tenant who had returned to Vienna after a “holiday in Libya”. The same is said to have happened with research into a Russian organization to which the third accused had been invited as party leader.
The prosecutor made no statement. The judgment is therefore not final.