AUSTRIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Michael Rohregger, Rohregger Rechtsanwälte
If, as a result of the perpetrator’s unlawful actions, a loss has been suffered, the parties who have suffered the loss may, to some degree, have asserted their claims already in the criminal proceedings and, in any event, in separate civil proceedings. Public-sector employees (particularly civil serv - ants) must additionally anticipate disciplinary proceedings by the administrative authorities. 7.2 Enforcement Bodies The criminal prosecution authorities against corruption offences in Austria are primarily the Public Prosecutor’s Office for Economic Crime and Corruption, and the Federal Bureau for Anti- Corruption, whereby the ordinary public prose - cutor’s offices and the police authorities are also permitted to investigate corruption offences. The public prosecutor’s office directs the preliminary investigation. It may conduct investigations itself or – as is generally the case – refer them to criminal investigators, particularly the Federal Bureau for Anti-Corruption, instructing them to undertake the requisite investigations. The Aus - trian Code of Criminal Procedure provides for various investigative measures, such as property searches, the securing of documents and moni - toring telephone conversations, so that these are available to the criminal prosecution authorities. The public prosecutor’s office has the possibility of suspending a preliminary investigation where there is no prospect of a successful prosecution. In addition, it may offer the accused the possibil - ity of diversion (that is an alternative procedure) and terminate the proceedings on this basis. It may also decide on exemption from penalty for a prosecution witness. If none of the aforemen - tioned options enters into consideration, it must bring a charge. In the event of a legally valid indictment, a main trial takes place before an
independent court. There are no special courts responsible for corruption matters, but within the criminal courts there often exist specialised panels for this purpose. 7.3 Jurisdictional Reach of Enforcement Bodies The public prosecutor’s office is under a duty of objectivity, and has a status equal to that of the defendant in the main trial. However, being in charge of the preliminary investigation, de facto it has numerous possibilities which are not open to the accused (for instance, conducting prop - In principle, the public prosecutor’s office cannot apply any discretion. If the corresponding pre - conditions are given for discontinuation, diver - sion, or the status of a prosecution witness, it must proceed accordingly. Only with regard to the question of which diversion measures enter into consideration – and, in the event of pay - ment of a monetary sum, the amount thereof – does it have a degree of scope. In any event, the accused has a legal right to the manner of proceeding. Arrangements between the public prosecutor’s office, the court and the accused are strictly prohibited. 7.5 Recent Landmark Investigations or Decisions erty searches and securing property). 7.4 Discretion for Mitigation and Aggravation There have been no landmark investigations or decisions in respect of bribery or corruption in the very recent past. 7.6 Level of Sanctions Imposed In theory, the penalty ranges up to a 15-year cus - todial sentence for natural persons (eg, Section 304 (2) of the Austrian Criminal Code) and a fine of EUR4.65 million for entities, whereby both
75
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook