TIROLER TAGESZEITUNG, leading article: "The rule of law, not the gallows", by Wolfgang Sablatnig

2023-09-06 20:00:32

Issued Thursday, September 7, 2023

Innsbruck (OTS) – Guilty and convicted but not in prison? This constellation is often difficult to understand. The conditional prison sentence against Florian Teichtmeister is not a “judgment of shame”, but that of a court in the constitutional state.

Hang him higher!” How else would it be understood when demonstrators carry a gallows on the sidelines of a trial. “Hang him higher!” They even wrote the delinquent’s name on the gallows. If they talk their way out of doing an art action, they want to take the public for a fool. It will be exciting to see whether the public prosecutor’s office will investigate the gallows. Two lawyers have filed a complaint.
The process and the verdict against the fallen actor Florian Teichtmeister let emotions run high. Hardly anyone is left untouched. Many, including the author of these lines, are glad they didn’t have to hear the “horrible things” themselves in the courtroom. But having no opinion about it is out of the question simply because of the man’s prominence and the large number of “horrible” pictures.
Against this background, the guardians of virtue of their own grace on the Internet had plenty of time to stir themselves up. The result is the gallows, lurid headlines on supposedly journalistic Internet platforms and the front page of a Viennese tabloid: “Judgment of Shame”.
No, it is not a “judgment of shame”. It is the judgment of a court in the rule of law. And as befits a constitutional state, an appeal is possible. Teichtmeister accepted immediately. The public prosecutor’s office also agreed after a day’s consideration. She checked and saw no reason to demand a stricter punishment.
But yes, the verdict cannot be explained with (apparent?) common sense. The criminal law professor Andreas Venier explains quite understandably why he even considers the verdict to be “too severe”.
Interior Minister Gerhard Karner (ÖVP) also has a point if he does not understand the judgment “as a father and citizen”. Guilty and convicted but not in prison? This is difficult for non-lawyers to understand. Although: Teichtmeister is not “free” either, in view of the conditions and controls to which he will have to submit in the coming years.
“Lock him up?” What punishments are appropriate is always a political decision. The Teichtmeister case was already the reason for tightening up, which should soon become law. However, the Teichtmeister case was also an opportunity to review and improve child protection concepts, prevention and professional bans.
The goal must be clear: “Protect the children!” But with all the possibilities of the rule of law, in which perpetrators can also trust – and not with the means of mobs and lynch law.