News

Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry – Pitfalls for affected companies

08 October 2025

The Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry ("PCI") is a key monitoring instrument. It serves to investigate allegations of political misconduct, misbehaviour by political decision-makers and potential legal violations. PCIs pose substantial risks to the individuals involved. This is exemplified by the case of former German Federal Minister of Transport, Andreas Scheuer, who became the subject of parliamentary investigations in connection with a failed vehicle toll project and has now been charged by the Berlin Public Prosecutor's Office with making false statements under oath before the PCI. However, these kinds of risks are not limited to political actors. PCIs often also affect companies and their representatives, exposing them to both criminal risks and reputational harm. In these instances, PCIs are assigned an independent role, often parallel to economic criminal proceedings conducted by investigative authorities.

Extensive powers of the PCI

A PCI possesses extensive powers, rooted in Article 44 of the German Constitution (Grundgesetz - GG) and the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry Act (Untersuchungsausschussgesetz - PUAG). These powers largely correspond to those of law enforcement authorities.

Risks for companies due to investigative measures

One key power of a PCI is the examination of witnesses (Sec. 24 PUAG). Witnesses, including company executives, are obligated to appear before the PCI and testify. Testifying before the PCI entails criminal risks due to the legally mandated “duty of truthfulness” which carries penalties for making false statements.

Additionally, under Sec. 29, 30 PUAG, the PCI has the authority to request the surrender of evidence, such as documents, from private entities. If refused, the PCI may impose a fine (Sec. 29 (2) PUAG) to enforce compliance. To further compel surrender, the PCI can seek a search warrant.

Risks for companies due to the publication of the final report

The parliamentary inquiry procedure concludes with the report rendered under Sec. 33 PUAG. The so-called final report informs the Bundestag about the findings of the PCI. Its primary purpose is to identify political accountability, including a description of the facts as interpreted by the PCI. Increasingly, final reports include not only factual findings but also legal assessments that can be of significant relevance to affected companies, whether directly or indirectly. This is particularly critical since final reports are generally published as Bundestag print materials and made publicly accessible. Additionally, all parties involved, such as authorities and companies, are mentioned by name - unlike in anonymized judicial decisions.

While the findings of the PCI do not have legal binding or determinative effects (Art. 44 (4) Sentence 2 GG), courts must independently establish facts instead of adopting the PCI’s conclusions. However, prosecutors and courts may review the transcripts of witness statements. The results of the PCI can therefore influence parallel criminal proceedings - in addition to a potentially damaging "medial prejudgement ", which should not be underestimated.

Despite these significant risks, affected companies often lack effective legal remedies to challenge the PCI’s findings as documented in the final report. According to PUAG regulations, companies substantially impacted by the report are merely given the opportunity to submit a statement before the inquiry concludes. This statement must generally be submitted within two weeks (Sec. 32 (1) PUAG). Relevant portions of the draft final report are provided to the affected parties for their feedback. The essential content of the company's statement is then included in the final report (Sec. 32 (2) PUAG).

Preventive measures for companies

The following measures help reduce reputational and criminal risks associated with a PCI:

Prompt review of applicable deadlines and obligations.
Early assessment of the need for legal consultation by an external attorney for companies and corporate representatives.
Securing the factual basis to avoid inaccurate statements and prepare for questioning.

Authored by Désirée Maier, Dr. Sebastian Gräler, and Dr. Noel Schröder.