Breach of Trust Trial Against Strache: Witnesses Fail to Confirm Internal Party Resolutions on Life Insurance

The Viennese FPÖ had taken out the insurance, covering both survival and death, in 2007 for its then chairman for a period of ten years, after such a policy had already existed since 2001 for Strache's predecessor as Viennese party chairman, Hilmar Kabas. For the public prosecutor's office, this constitutes a "self-dealing transaction" ("In-sich-Geschäft"), because when the contract was amended, Strache acted both as a representative of the Viennese FPÖ and as the former beneficiary in the survival case, as well as the new beneficiary. Strache rejects the accusations.

Testimony on the Insurance's Background

Strache's predecessor as Viennese party chairman, Hilmar Kabas, had informed him of the existence of the insurance around 2010, one of the witnesses recounted. He had been glad that "he (Strache; note) was provided for, he is entitled to that," said the former party associate, who, like Strache, left the party following the so-called Ibiza scandal. Like others, he had been "provided for," he said as justification.

That the party had taken out life insurance policies for Strache and his predecessor as Viennese party chairman, he had only learned "en passant," the witness stated. When asked by Strache's lawyer whether he could explicitly rule out that corresponding resolutions had been adopted, he said he could not, however, "explicitly rule out" that there had been resolutions on the matter.

The long-standing Viennese FPÖ managing director and current member of the Federal Council (Bundesrat) Andreas Guggenberger stated that he was aware of neither resolutions on the conclusion of the insurance nor of a "Vereinbarung" regarding the later registration of Strache as the beneficiary in the survival case. On Tuesday as well, not a single witness was able to confirm such a resolution or the "Vereinbarung."

Fichtenbauer as Witness

The former Viennese FPÖ General Secretary and current Ombudsman Peter Fichtenbauer also testified as a witness. The judge appeared visibly surprised and countered him: "Manches vergisst man dann doch nicht im Leben." Fichtenbauer ultimately explained that his law firm had merely provided the premises and a clerical assistant.

The "Vereinbarung" by which Strache was registered as beneficiary is said to have been signed at his law firm. Fichtenbauer further said that he did not know who had drafted the text: "Wenn Sie mich auf die heiße Herdplatte setzen würden, ich kann es Ihnen nicht besser sagen." When the judge asked whether a refusal to testify (Entschlagung) might still be possible, the presiding judge interrupted him after a while: "Aber noch wäre es nicht zu spät für eine Entschlagung." Fichtenbauer then relented: "Angesichts 'Ihrer unendlich geschätzten Person werde ich meine Erinnerung strapazieren'."

Regarding the practices in internal party committee meetings, in particular whether and who had to keep the minutes, there had been "keine großen Formerfordernisse," another witness said. This was "Usus," because top politicians were "einem erhöhten Risiko ausgesetzt." Upon further questioning, this witness too was unable to identify any concrete resolution regarding the life insurance.

Further Witnesses Without Recollection

The former politician and OeNB Director Eduard Schock, who had served for many years in several positions within the Viennese FPÖ, also testified as a witness that he did not know much about the life insurances in question. He could not say who had drafted the text of the "Vereinbarung". "Von der Existenz der Versicherung habe er lediglich 'en passant' erfahren," Schock was quoted as saying.

Strache had already rejected the public prosecutor's accusations at the start of the trial and emphasized that the life insurance had been taken out in accordance with the party's rules. His defense argues that the insurance was a customary provision for exposed politicians and not an unlawful transaction.

Defense Line and Possible Consequences

The public prosecutor's office bases its indictment, among other things, on internal Viennese FPÖ documents as well as on the statements of several former party officials, which are intended to reconstruct the sequence of events surrounding the contract amendment in 2014. In the event of a conviction, Strache faces a multi-year prison sentence as well as the forfeiture of all political offices.

The trial will continue on Wednesday with the questioning of further witnesses. The judge and the public prosecutor's office announced that the focus would be placed on the financial flows surrounding the life insurance and on the role of Viennese FPÖ officials. A verdict is not expected before the end of the summer.

Outlook on the Trial

Observers of the proceedings pointed out that the witnesses' testimony on Tuesday painted a picture of an informal, strongly oral decision-making style within the Viennese FPÖ. According to this account, resolutions were often not recorded in writing, which makes the subsequent reconstruction of the events more difficult. Strache himself did not comment on the testimony on the sidelines of the hearing.

The case is closely linked to the so-called Ibiza scandal, which in 2019 led to the collapse of the turquoise-blue coalition and ultimately also to Strache's departure from the FPÖ. The ongoing investigations and court proceedings for breach of trust, aggravated breach of trust, and partly for bribery have repeatedly brought to light new details about the internal workings of the Viennese party structure.