The cause caused a stir in Garmisch-Partenkirchen's political industry: last year, chief critic Martin Sielmann (FDP) received an official reprimand in the local council for having passed on confidential information.
The interior committee of the Bavarian state parliament has now confirmed the admissibility of the complaint - and rejected a petition from the liberal.
Garmisch-Partenkirchen
- It happens again and again that politicians do not take the duty of confidentiality so seriously - and have to take criticism for it.
In the case of the Garmisch-Partenkirchen local councilor Martin Sielmann, the reprimand immediately assumed a highly official character.
The FDP man was reprimanded by the market town last year.
The reason: The Liberal had sent a report from the auditing office containing sensitive and personal data as an attachment to an application via email - and thus crossed a red line.
Spicy: Among the recipients was an ex-member of the municipal council, i.e. someone for whom internal administrative matters are not (no longer) intended.
Petition to the Bavarian State Parliament
Nevertheless, Sielmann protested because he was not aware of any guilt - and turned to the Bavarian state parliament with a petition. The representative, who is applying for a mandate in the Bundestag, argued that he was only interested in the matter. But the competent committee for municipal issues, internal security and sport did not share this point of view - and let Sielmann be dismissed. "The handling of matters by the Garmisch-Partenkirchen store complies with the applicable legal provisions and is not objectionable," says Peter Ringlstetter, Vice Press Spokesman for the State Parliament, summarizing the verdict in the best civil service German. "The committee therefore saw no way of making the petition a success."
The committee agreed with the state government's statement, explains the deputy and ex-environment minister Marcel Huber (CSU), who acted as a so-called rapporteur in the process. His résumé is unequivocal: "The complaint was justified."
This is how co-reporter and Sielmann's party friend Alexander Muthmann, who sits for the FDP in the Maximilianeum, sees it. "The Committee on Internal Affairs is not entitled to assess the appropriateness of the complaint, it has to limit itself to the legal assessment of the process," he says. The decision was made unanimously. Sielmann made an internal community paper public, although he was not authorized to do so under the existing legal situation. "The complaint is the weakest form of a regulatory measure and can be imposed instead of a fine," adds Muthmann.
And what does Sielmann say about the rebuff?
The local politician takes it calmly, speaks of a "petitesse" - and with a view to the unauthorized e-mail of a "formal error".
He'll let the matter rest.
“It is crucial that the municipal council finally - possibly after decades - has given itself a statute for the proper use and complete accounting of fraction funds,” he writes in a statement.
Vortex around parliamentary group funds
As a reminder, the report that the Free Democrat had circulated dealt with a delicate problem with the Free Voters.
With these group funds had ended up in the private accounts of the group chairman at the time.
Sielmann called for a new version of the statutes that regulate the payment of these subsidies - which has now happened.
"I consider it a success to have operated this urgently needed statute and to have enforced it as quickly as possible," explains the local politician.
The complaint "at the instigation of the First Mayor" surprised him very much.
Because town hall chief Elisabeth Koch (CSU) would have been able to advocate, in his view, years ago as parliamentary group chairman, for the rules that have now come into force for the use of parliamentary group funds.