First, it is an isolated case, followed by another, then another – and at some point an image appears.
Biol Aberdeen to be a "special movie", said "World Week". The candidate of the federal council of the CVP has "nails instead of fingers," wrote former Valais advisor Oskar Freysinger in the "Rhone newspaper". Even in NZZ, "it has left the impression of a tiny person aiming at material benefits".
The first individual case – Amherd's lease with Alpiq, published by "Walliser Bote". Other journalists then remembered that Amherd once wanted to deduct from the tax expense campaign costs of 60,000 francs, but in 2016 he fell to the federal court. Finally, the most serious claim was made: Five years ago, Viola Amherd wanted to bounce two young recruits for their share at a high end.
An officer forbade Amherd to pay the money. The State Council demanded the opposite.
When "Weltwoche" reports about this in mid-October, Viola Amherd is in the hospital with kidney stones and leaves the silly story to stand in the room without comments. He denies them only three weeks later, on November 8, at a media conference at Brig. Although he can not comment on the case in detail because of the notary's secret, he says. The representation of the "World Week" was "completely wrong". A journalist from Valais intervenes: "Did you also report that you did not pay off the two news of your associates at the request of the Cantonese Government?" "Yes, that's wrong," says Amherd.
Since then, the question is in the room: Who is "World Week" or Amherd?
The whole truth is as complex as Valais. This is apparent from the documents available at Tagesanzeiger.ch/Newsnet and allow you to locate the story in all its shades.
In the beginning there is an extraordinary property agreement. In 2013, the canton of Valais buys a part of the St. Stephen's Monastery. Ursula in Brig. Cost: 22 million francs. The notarial execution of the business transfers the Cantonal Government – CVP the absolute majority holds – CVP Viola Amherd's notary and national consultant. This is a lucrative job, especially in a canton whose notarial fees from the price regulator repeatedly estimated that they exceeded his needs. The company brings 34,000 Swiss francs to Amherd. Theoretically.
Excellent real estate business: For 22 million francs, the canton of Valais bought part of the monastery of St. Ursula in Brig. Photo by Pedro Rodrigues
The Cantonese government maintains an old, unwritten tradition to ensure that not only a person will benefit from such large orders. The lead notary is to share the fee from the state commission with other notaries who are new to the profession – a kind of initial capital for the new law firm. And as this tradition has, the favored young notaries do not even have to work. As a new notary, Amherd once benefited from such a distribution of fees.
He has not made friends everywhere: Viola Amherd. Photo: Raphael Moser
Back to Brig: When Viola Amherd takes over the job, she assures the government that she will respect the tradition. On January 5, 2013, she proposed by e-mail to the then competent Croatian Council, Claude Roch (FDP), that the two younger notaries of Oberwallis should receive 25% of the fee. Roch accepts the proposal – and so the two partners are named in the contract. On March 18, 2013, Amherd certifies the contract and, by the end of July, pays the bill. That's where the problems start.
It is not clear when and how the two young notaries will find out that they actually benefit from money in the case of St. Ursula. The two notaries reject any comment on request. What is certain is that Amherd does not pay the two months for a minute and the news of the associates – that's what the authorities say – is starting to push the canton at some point.
An illegal setting?
By the end of autumn 2013, the competent state council will be informed of the open account. This is no longer the FDP man Claude Roch, but the successor of SVP's Oskar Freysinger. On December 6, 2013, Freysinger writes a first letter on "Beloved Viola". On January 29, 2014, a second. Both are available at Tagesanzeiger.ch/Newsnet. They leave little to be desired in terms of clarity. Viola Amherd has violated the March 2013 purchase agreement (which she had drafted on her own) with non-payment of the two partners' contacts, Freysinger notes. And he violated a Cantonese government's decision.
In the second reminder, Freysinger states: "We expect you to solve the issue in the way of the Council of State." Only now, more than ten months after the completion of the property agreement, Amherd makes the transfer. 8500 francs reach the accounts of the two new notaries.
Video: Viola Amherd is presented as a bridge builder
Viola Amherd in an interview after the press conference at Brig (SDA / 8 November 2018)
Why does a notary need two reminders to fulfill a self-negotiation contract? Does Amherd want to keep the money for himself? Did we hope that young notaries would learn nothing about the end to which they were entitled? The issue is more complicated, yes, in part a camouflage. Freysinger's reminders were preceded by an intensive correspondence between the Amherd and the Cantonese authorities. And while Freysinger insisted on complying with the distribution of charges, his employees forbade Viola Amherd to pay the fees in advance.
She was never willing to pay the two new notaries, says Viola Amherd. From a visual point of view, however, there was a legal problem: In April 2013 – about a month after the resolution of the 22 million deal – the Calais of Valais sent a circular. The service responsible for the Notary Service informs the notaries of Valais of the legal situation with regard to the distribution of fees. The canton notes that many notaries separate the charges illegally. The reason for this formal clarification is not the case of Amherd. Nevertheless, he was, as he says today, upset. "Because of the circular, the distribution of fees was not legal."
"I think that"
In the coming months, Amherd sends several letters to the canton according to reliable, independent sources. It asks for a clear statement: Does the April Circular apply or does the distribution of fees previously claimed by the State Council apply? Just over a month before Freysinger's State Counselor's intervention with her for the first time seems clear. On November 8, 2013, a lawyer from Freysinger told her that the planned distribution of fees with the two new notaries was illegal. Therefore, it could not be done. Amherd does not want to comment on this correspondence because of his secret notary.
Is Amherd washed with this? He has proved he has done a lot to get a clear answer from the canton on the controversial pay question. But two questions arise. First, it is not clear how she took herself against the two young notaries. Did you ever tell you, first of all, the fact that they need to get involved in the Deal St Ursula? And later, that nothing will come from it? "I think I told them about it," says Amherd. But the thing was almost five years ago, and he could not remember it exactly.
"There was no intervention"
Second, how does her denial that there was no interference from the Cantonese government matches Freysinger's dedicated writings? "It was not an intervention, it was a response to my questions about whether the circular or the January 2013 proposal would be implemented," says Amherd.
At the beginning of November, at the Brig media conference, Viola Amherd asks why it is often the focus of such controversial stories. The Federal Council candidate replies that if you work for 30 years as a lawyer and a notary and if your view of politics is inevitable, "you are not all happy everywhere." And why are not such stories known about the other Candidates of the Federal Council? "I do not know," says Amherd. "Perhaps they have never worked and never infected anywhere."
Created: 14/11/2018, 23:20