2024-02-15 18:50:29
The Rules of Procedure Committee forwards referendums to the plenary session without concrete resolutions
Vienna (PK) – Negotiations between the parliamentary groups regarding a live broadcast of parliamentary investigative committees are ongoing. Like ÖVP MP Andreas Hanger today in Rules of Procedure Committee of the National Council explained, a panel of experts is planned next to clarify any outstanding questions. The ÖVP is still committed to public TV broadcasts, but “clean legislation” is needed, he emphasized. Finally, the applicable legal framework – such as data protection or personal rights – must be observed. ÖVP constitutional spokesman Wolfgang Gerstl was also interested in a quick consensus.
The discussion particularly revolves around the question of who is a politically or publicly exposed personality and who decides on this, as confirmed by Agnes Sirkka Prammer (Greens), among others. In your opinion, it is not possible to set general legal rules for this, as these are decisions made on a case-by-case basis. Prammer expects appropriate solutions from the planned round of experts and hopes for a decision soon. In the interests of transparency and education, a TV broadcast of U-committees would be essential, she emphasized.
NEOS MP Nikolaus Scherak also appealed to the negotiators to “get the process over with quickly”. The question of who is a publicly exposed person and who decides about it is not a complex one, “you just have to want it,” he said. In any case, it is a legal assessment, not a political one. Scherak can imagine, for example, that people who are of the opinion that they are not publicly exposed people can turn to a certain authority.
SPÖ relies on media responsibility
The SPÖ has a different approach. MP Kai Jan Krainer suggests that, in principle, the questioning of all respondents should be entrusted – “without any kind of pre-censorship by the MPs” – and that the media should decide which people to pixelate or how to protect their personal rights through other suitable measures – for example a change in tone – protect. After all, according to an agreement between the parties in 2015, the media would now receive the names of all respondents and decide for themselves which of them they would call with their full name or only an abbreviated name and which of them they would show a picture of. “They do it very well,” said Krainer. In addition, media also have to deal with media law on a daily basis.
Krainer’s party colleague Christoph Matznetter argued similarly, pointing out that live tickers from investigative committees also worked. He also claimed that those providing information were not defendants, but comparable to witnesses. He is convinced that a live broadcast would help to objectify the investigative committee. The SPÖ also sees some open questions, for example regarding material immunity. According to MP Krainer, with “good will” this could be “clarified quickly and well”.
FPÖ MP Philipp Schrangl expressed skepticism about the SPÖ’s proposals. It is necessary to make investigative committees more transparent, but with live broadcasts one cannot assume that the media “will sort it out somehow,” he said. You have to decide in advance which people will be transferred and which will not. This requires a body which, in Schrangl’s opinion, could be the procedural judge, the investigative committee itself or a judicial panel.
Aside from the topic of live broadcasts, Schrangl also believes it is necessary to think about how media prejudice should be dealt with. People would be “destroyed” economically and personally, even if they were not later found guilty, he emphasized. This question will also continually concern committees of inquiry.
Just over 100,000 signatures for the referendum
The reason for the debate in the Rules Committee was a referendum (2175 d.B.), which advocates a live broadcast of parliamentary investigative committees and was signed by 102,755 Austrians. In the interests of transparency, the population must be able to follow at least media-public meetings via direct transmission in image and sound, according to the initiative launched by Lukas Papula. Specifically, a live stream should be offered on the parliamentary website and also made available to interested media. The declared goal of the initiators is to spread the surveys of respondents as widely as possible, with their main focus being on people of public interest.
Papula was unable to promote the referendum in the committee today: Due to the meeting being called at short notice, the initiators of the referendum were not able to take part in the deliberations. However, you have the opportunity to submit a statement on the committee report. Finally, the plenary session of the National Council will now once again deal with the issue of the referendum.
According to the current legal situation, only media representatives can follow the questioning of respondents in U-committees. The interview protocols will later be published on the Parliament website, provided the interview was not held in camera. (end) gs
Questions & Contact:
Press service of the Parliamentary Directorate
Parliamentary correspondence
Tel. +43 1 40110/2272
pressedienst@parlament.gv.at
www.facebook.com/OeParl
www.twitter.com/oeparl
1708023264
#Live #broadcast #Ucommittees #Negotiations #factions #ongoing