Anonymous report for abuse of office filed against Thomas Schmid at WKStA

The starting point of the complex of proceedings is the so-called Postenschacher trial against the former ÖVP parliamentary group leader August Wöginger in Linz, which ended in May with non-final guilty verdicts. In the course of these proceedings, Schmid, who at the time was Finance Secretary-General, had testified that he had "little to nothing" to do with Freistadt. A former section chief, however, described Schmid's role as considerably more active. In addition, during the trial the suspicion arose that political intervention on behalf of an ÖVP man had not only occurred on Wöginger's instructions with regard to the board position at the Braunau tax office, but earlier as well — in Freistadt.

Former ÖVP Chancellor Sebastian Kurz subsequently filed a report against Schmid for making a false statement. The Linz Public Prosecutor's Office opened investigations in April and passed them on "just as swiftly to the WKStA," as the report states. Last week, the Linz prosecutors sent the file to their colleagues in Vienna. At the WKStA, jurisdiction is now being reviewed, as is the case with the additional reports regarding false testimony.

False-statement proceedings from Linz

The anonymous abuse-of-office report is procedurally distinct from the false-statement report. False statement (committed in Linz) is tried before a single judge; abuse of office (Vienna) is tried before a lay judges' panel (Schöffensenat). Under the Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure, the authority that must handle all proceedings against an accused person is the one responsible for the "higher-ranking" proceeding — "higher outranks lower."

Jurisdictional questions between the WKStA and Linz

The WKStA had initially declared itself not competent. The General Prosecutor's Office confirmed this view and ruled that Linz must conduct the proceedings. For offenses such as abuse of office, the WKStA, as a specialized authority, can take over proceedings at the request of other public prosecutor's offices if "a special public interest exists due to the significance of the crime to be clarified or the person of the suspect."

What is remarkable is Schmid's role in the entire complex: the WKStA is the very authority that granted Schmid crown witness status at the end of 2024. Whether the new allegations might be old ones that the WKStA has already reviewed and — following approval by the specialized supervisory authority — did not prosecute, is left open in the report. Meanwhile, according to KURIER information, further reports regarding Schmid's alleged false statements have been received in Linz.

Crown witness status and open questions

This week, the entire file landed at the WKStA. The authority is now reviewing whether it will take over the false-statement proceedings and the additional reports regarding false testimony. A report for abuse of office has been received by the Vienna Public Prosecutor's Office. Nothing has yet been disclosed about the outcome of the reviews and possible further steps.

The case also has a political dimension: the Postenschacher trial concerned, among other things, the filling of a board position at the Braunau tax office. Should the WKStA actually take over the proceedings, it would have to decide how to handle the new allegations despite Schmid's existing crown witness status.

Overall, the episode illustrates how complex jurisdictional questions in the Austrian criminal justice system can be when a suspect appears in multiple proceedings in different locations. The WKStA's decision on jurisdiction and the substantive review of the abuse-of-office report is therefore likely to be awaited with great interest.