An article by Online-Magazine Akin, published on February 3rd 2015, criticized that there were no thorough investigations into abuse allegations against policemen. This article calls on a safety report published in 2011 in which 619 allegations were reported though no charges were pressed by the public prosecutors office at any of these cases. The main point of criticism was that investigations into abuse allegations are being carried out by policemen, that are not independent enough.
The Safety report from ministry of internal affairs
Looking at the 2013 safety report issued by the Ministry of the Interior, the numbers are falling slightly. The public prosecutor's office investigated 546 abuse allegations against policemen. Charges against officers were pressed in only four cases while only two ended in convictions. The safety report argues that the number of cases is inflated because even minor injuries are being investigated by the public prosecutor's office. Injuries can be caused by routine actions as handcuffing suspects or the use of pepper spray. An investigation has to be conducted even when the injured person does not press any charges. According to the Ministry of the Interior this proceeding is the reason for the high number of abuse allegations. The obvious consequence of course is that most of the investigations end without charges being pressed.
The Ministry of the Interior instructs that investigations can only be executed by independent public investigators. Every mention of abuse has to be notified to the public prosecutor's office. The notification either comes from the according County Crime Commission or the Federal Office against Corruption. Despite being forwarded to the public prosecutor's office, all investigations are being executed either by the County Crime Commission or the Federal Office against Corruption. Apparently one can question their independence.
Human Rights Council
With its main function to assure human rights, the Human Rights Council was founded in 1999, formally independent, but subordinated to the ministry of the interior. With a 2007 published report named "The Police as Offenders" the Council exposed deficits in investigations on abuse allegations against policemen. Since then the Human Rights Council started a working group exclusively on this issue. This group proposed to the Ministry of Interior to establish an Independent Police Complaints Commission, which led to an expansion of competence for the Federal Office of Anti-Corruption. In 2012 - in addition to the OPCAT-Implementation Act - a new Human Rights Council was established as the new advisory body to the Office of the Ombudsperson. The former Human Rights Council had to stop their work in the field of police observation. In some of the incidents, however, many questions remained unresolved or cases were closed prematurely. Since then no other institution continued their unfinished reports.
Judification - The 24 hours decree
The suspicion of maltreatment must be reported to the public attorney within 24 hours. This includes all facts of the investigation, like lodgement of facts of a case, preservation of evidence, interrogation, medical examination, photographic documentation, statement of police officers and questioning of witnesses. Regardless of the duty to report the ministry, the 24h decree obliges the police to conduct investigations independently, which can lead to insufficient documentation. When the 24 hours are passed, it's impossible to continue further commission of the police due to actions being too far in the past. In this case the law enforcement agency has no other chance then to end the lawsuit.
Statements by the police
While the numbers are falling slightly, the police is treated with general suspicion. When talking to inspectors about the subject, the answers are clearly destructive. A male inspector deplores, that most of his Policemen act too brutal. A female inspector agrees on this fact and states, that there are lots of abuse allegations against policemen, that the public doesn't even know about.
When dealing with reports against the police a keyword often mentioned is the so called „esprit de corps". It means, that a police officer protects the other. There's also a remnant of tradition that prosecutors do not investigate too thoroughly allegations against the police. Another impediment, that might prevent further investigations. When it comes to documenting injuries, victims are treated by Public Health Officers. Those are appraisers for the police and might be prejudiced. Therefore it is important to assure, that victims of police violation are treated by independent institutions like hospitals or private doctors.
Public's Attorney - Contact person for victims
Victims of violence by policemen are in a tough situation. They have no-where to go. Usually complaints are being filed with the police which leads to the akward situation, that the victim has to file a complaint against a policeman at a police station. It is obvious, that many victims might feel awed and don't dare filing complaints. It is widely unknown that the Public's Attorney (www.volksanwaltschaft.gv.at) is responsible for such cases and offers advice.
Since 1977 the Federal Constitution states that the Public's Attorney has to control public authorities in Austria. Since 2012 it is constitutionally responsible for the abidance of human rights. The Public's Attorney is being elected by the National Council (Nationalrat) and consists of three members that work together. Public Attorneys are being elected for 6 years each. They are independent and can neither be fired nor be withdrawn.
Sensitive topic in Austria
„Violence by Police" is a very controversial topic in Austria. Approaching authorities in regards to this topic produces almost no results and no response. Confronted with the results of the investigation, authorities didn't bother to give a statement. The Ombudsman Board represented another wall of silence due to their obligation of discretion. Furthermore it would be of great interest to know why the Austrian Human Rights Council was suspended in 2012. This council lobbied for an independent authority, which was intended to investigate complaints against police officers. Such an authority has never been established. Institutional reforms which foster critical examination or discussion of contradictions inside the police force are only passed rudimentarily. As journalists like Florian Klenk pointed out, the critics on the conduct of the police was and continues to be stigmatized as incitement against the police officers. Finding a victim of police-violence, is almost impossible. Hardly anybody wants to go public, because they are afraid of the authorities. We contacted Amnesty International in order to get in touch with victims, but for privacy reasons they couldn't give us any information.
A combination of various circumstances, including legislation (24 hours decree) Corp Culture (attorney's , Public Health Officer), lack of independence of the Complaints Board, as well as fear of the victims, conclude that many complaints against the police are closed prematurely. It is a good start that the Public's Attorney is an independent authority that looks after the abidance of human rights. However, there should also be an authority that independently investigates abuse allegations against policemen. This is fundamental to achieve fair lawsuits. They should be more transparent. It's not only the victims, who will benefit, but also the accused policemen.