His resignation as SPD general secretary was a bang. Allegations that he behaved inappropriately towards young women led Arif Tasdelen to do so. The commission responsible has now completed its report.
Munich (dpa / lby) – After the resignation of the former Bavarian SPD general secretary Arif Tasdelen, the party’s internal commission for processing the allegations against him does not consider any further measures necessary. After all, Tasdelen has already resigned, the “Nürnberger Nachrichten” quotes from the report, which is also available to the German Press Agency. Two young SPD politicians had accused Tasdelen of “inappropriate behavior,” which, according to both those affected and the commission, was not relevant under criminal law.
“The commission has processed the process. We thank them for their work and agree with the assessments,” commented the board of the Bavarian SPD on the almost two-page report. For him and his family, too, the issue is settled, Tasdelen told the “Nürnberger Nachrichten” (Wednesday). “This is a closing point.”
Exactly three weeks ago, the party’s controversial resignation caused surprise and unrest among the local Social Democrats because Tasdelen was supposed to play an important role as the main organizer of the election campaign before the state elections in October.
But shortly before Christmas, it became known that Tasdelen was not wanted by his own youngsters – the Jusos – because he is said to have behaved inappropriately towards young women in the summer. In one case, he is said to have insistently asked for the cell phone number of a young SPD candidate for the state parliament. According to Tasdelen, the question was purely professional. Nevertheless, he announced that he would formulate more carefully in the future and would like to take part in a so-called awareness training.
Without giving specific details, the Commission, with reference to its duty of confidentiality, now stated that “a situation that was subjectively felt to be stressful for those affected was undoubtedly given”. It is not denied that Tasdelen, according to his own account, had a different perception. The Commission did not carry out an objective assessment of Tasdelen’s conduct.
On the other hand, she clearly criticized the actions of the Jusos, who had declared Tasdelen an undesirable person. Before such a far-reaching decision, all sides should have been heard, the committee warned. “This is the only way to make an objective determination and assessment.” Especially since it should have been clear to the Juso state board that “according to general life experience, the facts would become public and the anonymity of those affected would also be endangered”. Instead, their anonymity was “unacceptably violated” by the procedure.
