The controversy surrounding Culture Minister Wolfram Weimer’s potential conflation of political office and private business ventures has deepened, now encompassing serious questions about the transparency and oversight of his crisis management response. Following accusations that Weimer failed to sufficiently separate his ministerial duties from his ownership stake in the Weimer Media Group, the group’s pledge to place his shares in trust is now facing intense scrutiny after the government admitted it does not know the identity of the person entrusted with this responsibility.
Responding to an inquiry from Green Party parliamentarian Katrin Göring-Eckardt, the federal government conceded it lacks information regarding the designated trustee, a revelation that has sparked widespread concern. Weimer initially announced his intention to temporarily relinquish control of his shares to a trustee in a bid to quell criticism surrounding his dual role as both shareholder and minister. The justification provided by State Minister Michael Meister, claiming the transfer arrangement fell outside the government’s purview, has done little to reassure critics.
The situation is further complicated by the nature of Weimer Media Group’s operations, which include organizing exclusive events offering access to politicians for a substantial fee. Despite denying any conflict of interest, Weimer ultimately agreed to place his holdings in trust, a decision now undermined by the government’s apparent lack of due diligence.
Experts are expressing disbelief that the government is not actively verifying the trustee’s neutrality. “At the very least, the federal government should know who is now managing the shares” stated Timo Lange, an expert at Lobbycontrol, in an interview with “Süddeutsche Zeitung”. “This is essential to ensure a clear separation between official duties and private interests.
The lack of transparency is generating considerable political fallout. Göring-Eckardt highlighted the importance of such disclosures to further demonstrate the Culture Minister’s commitment to impartiality and dispel lingering anxieties. She emphasized the government’s vested interest in upholding these standards, an interest seemingly absent in the current circumstances.
Efforts by “Süddeutsche Zeitung” to obtain clarification from Weimer himself through the designated government representative for culture and media – effectively, Weimer – were unsuccessful. The response indicated that the BKM, as an authority, was not directly involved in the matter and therefore unable to provide information. Similarly, the Weimer Media Group has remained unresponsive to repeated inquiries regarding the trustee and the broader call for transparency, a silence that adds to the growing sense of a deliberate lack of accountability.
