Kickl wins trial: Court stops inadmissible Hitler comparison!

Kickl wins trial: Court stops inadmissible Hitler comparison!

Herbert Kickl, the chairman of the FPÖ, has won another legal case against the “Platform for Democracy Austria” association. The Vienna Higher Regional Court rejected the association's appeal against a ruling by the commercial court and confirmed its decision, which sentenced the association to cease and desist and pay damages. Kickl, who is known for his statements and positions, will receive compensation of 5,000 euros.

The subject of the dispute was a video that compared Kickl with Adolf Hitler. The recording, which was distributed on YouTube, had the provocative title "Do you want that? Our Austria is in danger" and warned about the political ambitions of Kickl, who had described himself as the "People's Chancellor". The video showed a theater of war from the Second World War, in which Kickl's face was integrated into the words "Project Volkskanzler".

Judicial assessment

The commercial court ruled that the video linked Kickl to National Socialism without any justifiable reason. The judge made it clear that there was no sufficient factual basis for such a comparison. In particular, the use of the term “People's Chancellor” is not enough to establish a direct connection between Kickl and Adolf Hitler and the associated mass murder. This view was also shared by the Higher Regional Court, which largely supported the commercial court's assessment.

The decision of the Higher Regional Court marks the end of the proceedings, as an appeal was not permitted. This means that the club has no further legal options to take action against the judgment. The legal steps were deemed important to clarify the boundaries of expression and criticism in the political arena.

Consequences for the political discussion

The legal disputes surrounding Kickl and the video shed light on the current political tensions in Austria. They illustrate the challenges that arise from the use of historical comparisons in political discourse. Critics of such comparisons often argue that they are not only inadmissible but also harmful to political culture and historical memory.

For Kickl, the verdict represents another success in his ongoing fight against what is perceived as defamatory reporting. While he continues to pursue his views, it remains to be seen how the political landscape in Austria will develop under the influence of such disputes. For more information on this topic, see the analyzes and reports on The press and 5min, as well as in the comprehensive study JKU.