Human rights in Austria are generally respected by the government; however, there were problems in some areas. There were some reports of police abuse and use of unjustified force against prisoners. Antisemitic incidents, including physical attacks, name-calling, property damage, and threatening letters, telephone calls, and Internet postings occurred during the year. There was some governmental and societal discrimination against fathers, Muslims and members of unrecognized religious groups, particularly those considered "sects". There were incidents of neo-Nazi activity, rightwing extremism, and xenophobia. Trafficking in women and children for prostitution and labor also remained a problem.
The Austrian litigation association of NGOs against discrimination (:de:Klagsverband) is an umbrella body with (at March 2024) 69 members. It offers member organisations legal advice and support in cases of discrimination based on gender, ethnicity or origin, sexual orientation, disability, age, religion and belief.
Respect for the integrity of the person
Freedom from arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of life There were no known instances of arbitrary or unlawful killings carried out by the government or its representatives.
In August 2006, a court in Vienna convicted four officers from the Wiener Einsatzgruppe Alarmabteilung, an elite police unit, for abusing and severely injuring Gambian asylum seeker Bakary J. earlier that year during a deportation procedure. The sentences included eight months of suspended imprisonment for three officers, and six months suspended for a fourth. The Austrian branch of Amnesty International condemned the judgments as overly lenient.
Also in August, legal representation for a Nigerian asylum seeker reported that Austrian law enforcement officers had inflicted physical harm on their client during a deportation attempt. The incident allegedly took place in Frankfurt, Germany, after the individual declined to board a flight to Nigeria.
Disappearances
There were no reports of politically motivated disappearances.
Freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment
The law prohibits such practices; however, there were reports that police beat and abused persons.
In 2005 the Council of Europe's Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) reported a "considerable number" of allegations of police mistreatment of criminal detainees. The interior ministry investigated these cases but concluded that none of the accusations could be verified.
During the year the government continued to deny an extradition request from Kosovo authorities in the case of a police officer convicted in his absence for torture while serving in Kosovo's civilian international police in 2003. The government recalled the officer from Kosovo, but allowed him to remain on duty during the investigation. Following the investigation, the officer was removed from his former job in the Ministry of the Interior and demoted to a lower position. In October, the government officially closed the case.
There were no reports during the year that army officials mistreated conscripts. However, in August 2017 a conscript died during a march. After this event some former conscripts unveiled that they had been exposed to intimidation and humiliation during their service time.
Prison and detention Center conditions
Prison conditions generally met international standards in many areas, and the government permitted visits by independent human rights observers. A May report by the Human Rights Advisory Council explicitly criticized pre-deportation conditions in 2005 as "questionable from a human rights point of view," and, at times "not in conformity with human rights standards."
Some human rights observers criticized the incarceration of nonviolent offenders, such as persons awaiting deportation, for long periods in single cells or inadequate facilities designed for temporary detention. In 2005 the CPT noted that juveniles were not always separated from adults at the Linz prison.
Freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention
The law prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention, and the government generally observed these prohibitions; however, the strict application of slander laws tended to discourage reports of police abuse.
The country has a police force that is responsible for maintaining internal security. The Ministry of Interior controls the police, while the Ministry of Defense controls the army, which is responsible for external security. The police were generally well trained and disciplined. On August 31, a senior Vienna police officer, Ernst Geiger, received a three-month suspended sentence for violation of confidentiality rules. Geiger had allegedly informed the owner of a sauna of an upcoming police raid on March 9. Vienna's top police official, Roland Horngacher, was suspended from office on August 9 and faces charges of accepting improper gifts and abuse of office for suspected leaking of information to journalists. Government statistics for 2005 showed there were 1,047 public complaints against federal police officials; of those, 960 were dropped. In 18 court cases, two officers were convicted of using unjustified force and two cases were pending at the end of the year. Some police violence appeared to be racially motivated. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and other groups continued to criticize the police for targeting minorities. During the year the interior ministry conducted racial sensitivity training programs for over 2,000 police and other officials with NGO assistance. The Human Rights Advisory Council monitors police respect for human rights and makes recommendations to the minister of the interior. During the year the council issued several recommendations to improve processing of pre-deportation and juvenile delinquent cases.
In criminal cases the law provides for investigative or pretrial detention for up to 48 hours; an investigative judge may decide within that period to grant a prosecution request for detention of up to two years pending completion of an investigation. The law specifies grounds required for such investigative detention and conditions for bail. The investigative judge is required to evaluate such detention periodically. There is a system of bail. The police and judicial authorities respected these laws in practice. Detainees also had prompt access to a lawyer; however, the CPT noted in 2004 that criminal suspects who lack the means to pay for legal services may be appointed an ex officio lawyer only after the court's decision to detain them, i.e. 96 hours after their apprehension.
Availability of fair public trials
The law provides for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected this provision in practice.
The court system consists of local, regional, and higher regional courts, as well as the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is the highest judicial body, while the Administrative Court acts as the supervisory body over administrative acts of the executive branch. The Constitutional Court presides over constitutional issues.
The law provides for the right to a fair trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right. A system of judicial review provides extensive possibilities for appeal. Trials must be public and conducted orally. Persons charged with criminal offenses are considered innocent until proven guilty. Defendants have the right to be present during trials. While pro bono attorneys are supposed to be provided to indigent defendants, the CPT in its 2004 report found that there were generally not enough lawyers in criminal matters, financial arrangements were inadequate, and lawyers were not available around the clock. The report concluded that, as there is no effective system of free legal aid for indigent persons in police custody, any right of access to a lawyer at that stage remains, in most cases, purely theoretical.
There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.
There is an independent and impartial judiciary in civil matters, including an appellate system. This is available for lawsuits seeking damages for human rights violations.
Freedom from arbitrary interference with privacy, family, home, or correspondence
The law prohibits such actions, and the government generally respected these prohibitions in practice.
Civil Liberties
Freedom of speech and press
The law prohibits neo-Nazi activity, including making statements that deny the Holocaust. On February 20, the Vienna regional court convicted British writer David Irving and sentenced him to a three years in prison on charges of neo-Nazi activity. In 1989 Irving reportedly denied the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz and claimed that unknown individuals dressed in Sturmabteilung uniforms committed the Reichskristallnacht crimes in November 1934. On August 29, the Supreme Court confirmed the guilty-verdict. On December 20, the Vienna court of second instance suspended two thirds of Irving's three-year prison sentence. Because Irving had been in custody since November 11, 2005, he was released from prison and deported to Great Britain.
On April 26, the Vienna Criminal Court convicted John Gudenus, a former Freedom Party member of the upper house of parliament, to a one-year suspended sentence for violating the law banning neo-Nazi activity. In public interviews in 2005, Gudenus had questioned the existence of gas chambers and belittled the suffering of concentration camp inmates during the Holocaust.
The independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views without restriction.
There were no government restrictions on access to the Internet or reports that the government monitored e-mail or Internet chat rooms. Individuals and groups could engage in the peaceful expression of views via the Internet, including electronic mail.
There were no government restrictions on academic freedom or cultural events.
Freedom of peaceful assembly and association
The law provides for freedom of assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights in practice.
Freedom of religion
The law provides for freedom of religion, and the government generally respected this right in practice.
The law divides religious organizations into three legal categories: officially recognized religious societies, religious confessional communities, and associations. Numerous unrecognized religious groups have complained that the law obstructs legitimate claims for recognition and relegates them to second-class status. As of December the European Court of Human Rights had not ruled on a 2003 complaint by the Jehovah's Witnesses challenging the legality of the requirement that a group must exist for 10 years in the country before it can be recognized by the government.
The conservative Austrian People's Party (ÖVP) denied party membership to members of unrecognized religious groups, which it considered "sects," that hold a view of mankind fundamentally different from the party's, advocate opinions irreconcilable with the ÖVP's ethical principles, or reject basic rights granted by "progressively minded" constitutional states and in an open society. The ÖVP denied membership to members of the Church of Scientology.
The city of Vienna funded a counseling center of a controversial NGO, the Society Against Sect and Cult Dangers (GSK), which actively worked against alleged sects and cults. GSK distributed information to schools and the general public and offered counseling to persons who believe that sects and cults had hurt their lives.