After the decision of the Federal Court of Justice that the high mask commissions paid to former CSU politicians do not constitute bribery, Alfred Sauter and Georg Nüßlein see themselves confirmed. The decision shows, said the former member of the Bundestag Nüßlein, that “the allegations of corruption against me are unfounded”. “If such deals were forbidden for MPs, I would not have done any.” It was “not a deal with people’s needs”, but one against the need – compared to other offers, the state saved at least nine million euros in tax money “with our masks”.
The non-attached member of the state parliament Alfred Sauter said Augsburg General: “I feel confirmed in everything I said from the beginning.” Sauter had previously called the allegations “adventurous and constructed”. According to the Federal Constitutional Court, the professional activity of MPs is even desirable – because it promotes integration into people’s everyday lives.
Sauter is now finally entitled to his commission of more than 1.2 million euros, which Bavaria’s judiciary had temporarily confiscated. Nüßlein must get a similar sum back. In March, the two brokered mask contracts between a Hessian textile company and the federal government or Bavaria. On Tuesday, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) had not found any bribery according to the legal situation: For example, only the acceptance of consideration for actions “in the performance of the mandate” by politicians is punishable, for example in votes in parliament. Paragraph 108e of the Criminal Code does not cover the fact that MPs exercise their influence outside of political work. The hands of the courts are almost tied.
The Munich Higher Regional Court (OLG) had already decided in November, but almost regretted that the bribery clause was no longer available. The investigations of the Munich Public Prosecutor’s Office are now as good as off the table.
The debate about the penal code has flared up again. Bavarian representatives of the traffic light parties are also calling on the federal government to close the loopholes – this has already been agreed in Berlin and will probably come in the coming months, said Markus Rinderspacher (SPD). “Until now, the legislature had not reckoned with the audacity of such CSU politicians who unrestrainedly commercialize their mandate.” Rinderspacher also demands commitment to the reform from the party in which the deals took place: “The CSU is absolutely responsible.”
“The legal acquittal does not make up for the moral guilt.”
There are no two opinions in the CSU about how unfortunate the mask affair is with a view to the 2023 state election. And that the decision that Sauter and Nüßlein are allowed to keep the money counteracts Prime Minister Markus Söder’s claim to be “very close” to the people and their concerns. Some in the CSU are also considering whether another major surcharge on the subject of transparency is necessary. General Secretary Martin Huber said of Sauter on Tuesday: “The legal acquittal does not make up for the moral guilt.” When asked about further action, there was no comment from the CSU state leadership on Wednesday.
The chairman of the committee of inquiry into the mask affair and ex-minister of justice, Winfried Bausback (CSU), made a statement. He pointed out that the Free State had already tightened its right to delegates. “Unacceptable behavior” like Sauter’s would be “legally prohibited today” and the state parliament could punish it by confiscating profits, for example.
And the loopy federal law? In January, the state parliament instructed the state government to work towards a federal reform of paragraph 108e. In the light of the decisions of the Higher Regional Court and the Federal Court of Justice, it is evident that the legal wording will be very demanding, says Bausback. “My personal intention is that the Union should get involved here constructively.” A broad consensus is desirable. According to a spokesman, Minister of Justice Georg Eisenreich (CSU) also sees “a need for reform, this is the task of the federal legislature”. However, the ministry is not aware of a Bavarian Federal Council initiative that is being discussed in the coalition factions in the state parliament.
A completely different question: What about Sauter’s return to the CSU parliamentary group, since he has officially done nothing wrong? When he left, he wrote to parliamentary group leader Thomas Kreuzer that everything would prove to be unfounded and that he wanted to “be accepted back into the parliamentary group” after the process had been completed. He is expressly not welcome there. On Wednesday, Kreuzer confirmed what he had already said after the OLG decision: the door is closed. Regardless of the criminal relevance, Sauter’s behavior was “morally reprehensible”. In doing so, he “did serious damage” to the CSU faction, so that re-entry was ruled out.