Four years in jail for Austria’s ex-finance minister Grasser | EUROtoday

In 2020, the previous finance minister in Austria, Grasser, was sentenced to eight years in jail for bribery. Now the Supreme Court has confirmed the responsible verdict, however decreased the jail sentence.

The former Austrian finance minister Karl-Heinz Grasser was sentenced to 4 years in jail for bribery in entrance of the nation’s Supreme Court. This was thus halved within the attraction course of.

The courtroom noticed it as confirmed that the previous FPÖ politician had blended to the infidelity and acceptance of items. The choose, which was made within the first occasion, opened up the Court of Justice.

Millions For inside data

Grasser, who held the publish as finance minister from 2000 to 2007, was sentenced to eight years in jail in 2020 after a few years of investigation on the Vienna Regional Court.

The 56-year-old was accused of giving a non-public investor in 2004 when promoting 60,000 federal flats on the mandatory buy worth. The investor’s actual property firm was capable of safe the contract as the very best bidding applicant. Grasser and different members are mentioned to have acquired commissions of 9.6 million euros.

The former FPÖ politician has at all times denied the allegations and appealed in opposition to the judgment. The Supreme Court now confirmed the responsible verdict for bribery and likewise the conviction for irregularities across the rental settlement of a tax authority. “These are serious crimes with serious consequences,” mentioned the presiding choose. So far, that is unprecedented in Austria.

Due to the lengthy interval of proceedings, nonetheless, the courtroom determined to cut back the imprisonment imposed. Despite the discount within the sentence, it stays the best in opposition to a prime Austrian politician.

Grasser proclaims a grievance in opposition to “incorrect judgment”

Grasser’s attorneys had spoken of a political judgment earlier than the Supreme Court. They doubted the choose’s objectivity as a result of her husband had negatively commented on the defendant on the quick message service X. The Supreme Court, then again, emphasised that judges had been capable of make goal judgments regardless of such expressions of opinion.

Grass additionally spoke of a “misjudgment” that violated regulation and justice and introduced a grievance to the European Court of Human Rights. However, this step doesn’t trigger the jail sentence.