Enlarge image
Is in the focus of the public prosecutor: Jürgen Pföhler, district administrator of the Ahrweiler district
Photo: Thomas Frey / dpa
After the initiation of an investigation against the district administrator of the Ahrweiler district, Jürgen Pföhler (CDU), and another member of the district's crisis team, who was severely affected by the floods, the public prosecutor's office provided further information on the status of the investigation.
"The culprit of all of this," quoted Chief Public Prosecutor Harald Kruse at the beginning of a press conference, an anonymous detective, "is primarily nature or fate."
That is certainly true, but one could possibly find criminally relevant human behavior that has contributed to the death and injuries of so many people.
Kruse justified the initiation of the procedure, among other things, with the fact that previous information, according to which the tidal wave rolled through the Ahr valley at high speed, was inaccurate.
It is now assumed that the flood of the Ahr reached the community of Schuld at 5 p.m. on July 14th.
Guilt is one of the hardest hit places in the region.
The city of Sinzig, which is also heavily flooded, however, did not reach the masses of water until around 2.30 a.m., said Chief Prosecutor Kruse.
There would have been around nine hours in between.
There are indications that the residents of the Ahr valley not yet affected by the tidal wave should have been warned and brought to safety on July 14th by 8:30 p.m. at the latest.
The question arises as to why a “clear warning to the population” and an evacuation of the residents only shortly after 11 p.m. was ordered.
It is unclear which means of communication were still available - some radio networks of the rescue services and fire brigade sirens failed due to the flood, but at least some of the networks still worked for a relatively long time, said Kruse.
CDU District Administrator Pföhler in the center of the investigation
The investigations are currently directed against the district administrator of the Ahrweiler district, Jürgen Pföhler (CDU) and another member of the crisis team.
According to the public prosecutor's office, this is not mentioned by name because it has no political function.
Above all, the division of responsibilities between the district administrator and the crisis team seems unclear at the moment.
According to the public prosecutor's office, the task force was in the district from 5.40 p.m.
In this way, according to Chief Public Prosecutor Kruse, the district administrator had "sole decision-making power" and "everyone else" had "only to cooperate" with him.
However, during the search earlier this morning, Pföhler informed the public prosecutor that "he had" delegated "the entire task force in general" to the officer, and had done so for "years."
Pföhler was apparently only briefly with the crisis team
The chief public prosecutor reported on the statements made by the district administrator that he was practically not in the district administration the whole time, and that is why he has no responsibility.
Pföhler justified the handing over of the task force by saying that "an expert" should take care of it, but he was a lawyer.
In addition, according to Kruse, there is also information that Pföhler and the Rhineland-Palatinate Interior Minister Roger Lewentz (SDP) "visited the crisis team" - that is, was only there for a short time.
But Pföhler explained that he could be reached via cell phone the whole time.
"He therefore sees no criminal responsibility for possible operational errors," said Kruse.
Kruse left it open whether "in fact responsibility has been given up", with the result that the proceedings against Pföhler will have to be discontinued.
It is conceivable that, despite the delegation, Pföhler could have "gone there, checked, asked" whether everything was done that was necessary and possible.
"Whether this is criminally relevant," says Kruse, "has yet to be checked."
The case of the dead in the dormitory in Sinzig seems relatively clear
Kruse specifically referred to the case of the dormitory for people with disabilities in Sinzig, where 12 residents drowned.
While in many other cases it would still have to be determined how the deaths came about and whether a timely warning could have prevented them, the case there is relatively clear, said Kruse.
There the responsible night watch had started to rescue residents in outbuildings.
The staff could not have reached the main building because of the flood.
"At least for these people," says Kruse, "it can be assumed that they could have been saved if they had been warned earlier."
fek / hip / dpa