The Misuse of §§ 278 ff and its Implications for Social
Activism
In front of our very eyes the Austrian State is carrying
out a hideous experiment. At the cost of 10 animal protectionists
the State is seeing how far they can use the Austrian Criminal
Code against people involved in social activism.
The so called §§ 278 ff is being used for the first time
by the Ministry of the Interior and the Police against non-government
organisations.
This law is intended for dealing with organised crime of
a severe nature, such as human trafficking, drug dealing,
and forced prostitution and so on. These kinds of criminal
organisations are characterised by central figures who give
orders to lower ranking members to break the law and then
reap the financial gains themselves.
Enacted appropriately, this law makes it possible to charge
and convict central figures in criminal organisations who,
would otherwise remain out of the law’s reach.
Enacted inappropriately, this law can be used to repress
any form of social activism
After detailed study of this law, we can see in the following
summary how this is possible: The central point to this
law is that individuals and groups which function autonomously
and in secret can be accredited to another organisation
as long as both have the same aim or philosophy.
Individuals and small groups which function secretly and
autonomously do not take orders and act independently. Nevertheless,
according to the State Prosecution’s interpretation of this
law, it is possible to convict individuals for illegal activities
carried out by persons not even known to them. It is only
necessary to prove that the two parties share the same aim
and ideology.
Taken to its logical conclusion this law used in this way
means a kin liability for social activism. The kin liability
was used in the Third Reich to make relatives of those accused
of crimes also guilty.
The present situation means that every person who, belongs
to a political movement, i.e., shares and is active for
the common goals and philosophy of this movement can be
prosecuted under article 278a should any criminal activity
take place which has been motivated by the common goals
and philosophy of that movement. This is regardless of whether
this person has committed a crime or not.
This is why it has been possible to hold the 10 animal
protectionists on remand for so long without any concrete
charges.
They are not being charged with the incidents of damage
to property listed by the prosecution. By charging the 10
under article 278a the prosecution do not need to find the
people responsible for these offences. To prosecute the
10 they merely need to demonstrate that they share the same
goals as those that motivated the criminal offences; in
this case an end to animal exploitation.
|
