Mudam: Why the Cultural Commission only receives a complete insight under conditions

The commission d’Ccès aux documents (CAD) in the State Ministry decided unanimously: the complete power point presentation of the consulting company Qualia-an inventory for the problems in the Mudam from the winter of 2024-is not released for the chamber’s cultural commission. In any case, the document must not be published in any case. A insight by the MPs is possible, but confidentiality towards the public must be preserved.

After the debate with Minister of Culture Eric Thill, the MPs received the first excerpts – including the central record. This came to the press. There should be no further details from this for the public.

It was necessary to weigh up the details between data protection and the necessary transparency. « The CAD notes that the document presented for the assessment is mainly based on assessments or value judgments mentioned or easily identified natural persons, but also on opinions that have been expressed in confidential conversations, » the Commission writes in its Avis to an applicant whose name has not been published. « Although these opinions were collected in conversations with an external company, they are addressed to the Mudam board of directors. »

And with this, for example, the MPs of the Cultural Commission are not entitled to know these details without conditions. Because: « Documents that contain an evaluation or assessment or a statement that has been sent by confidence to an authority can only be passed on to the persons concerned under certain conditions. » And in this case the MPs are only under conditions; And access is not possible for the public and journalists.

The Mudam case will continue to employ the Culture Commission. On the agenda of the next meeting, the processes in the Kirchberg Museum are again part of the consultations. After the debate, the new president of the Mudam Board of Directors, Jean-Paul Olinger, expressed the events. It sees a difference between media reporting and the real conditions.

_________________

In a first published version of the article, it was said that the MPs of the Chamber Culture Commission also did not make access to all details possible. That was a mistake that was corrected. We apologize for this.