At the opening of his trial, former Green Party MP and former mayor of Differdange, Roberto Traversini, declined to make a statement to the press.
The public prosecutor’s office has charged Traversini with an illegal conflict of interest, alleging he abused his former office for personal gain. Additional charges include misappropriation of public funds, forgery, and breach of trust.
On the trial’s first day, Traversini’s defence called several witnesses to contextualise the allegations. All witnesses testified that they could not imagine the former mayor acting for his own benefit, asserting he had always acted in the interest of the municipality.
One charge relates to his role in amending Differdange’s General Development Plan (PAG) to re-zone an area from a garden to a residential zone. The affected plot included a house owned by close acquaintances from whom Traversini later inherited the property. The municipal secretary clarified, however, that the vote pertained to several houses in a similar situation and that Traversini was not present for the final decision, having already resigned following the so-called “Garden Shed Affair.”
A second accusation centres on Traversini’s alleged use of a municipal intern to draft plans for work on both the inherited house and a property belonging to his partner. Regarding his partner’s house, several potential municipal projects were reportedly considered, including a therapeutic centre. A former member of Differdange’s municipal executive board (“Schäfferot”), called as a witness, stated that it was standard municipal procedure to advance funds for such projects with the expectation of later reimbursement from the state.
The prosecution further alleges that Traversini employed workers from the CIGL employment initiative for tasks related to his inherited house without compensation. Testifying for the defence, the president of CIGL Esch stated that such work is always invoiced. He too described Traversini – the former president of CIGL Differdange – as a “dedicated politician” who had significantly expanded the initiative in the municipality.
Traversini’s partner is also a defendant in the case, accused of complicity in the alleged illegal conflict of interest. A municipal official faces the same charge. A separate municipal official, whose case was severed from this trial for health reasons, will not be tried at present.
At the outset of the proceedings, both the municipal official and Traversini’s partner declined to give statements to the court. They merely indicated that they reject all charges brought against them.
The trial is scheduled to resume Tuesday afternoon with the questioning of the accused and the presentation of arguments from the prosecution and defence.
