Skip to content

Leverkusen Bridge scandal deepens as auditor's report revisions spark bias claims

A bridge built on flawed steel now faces a crisis of trust. Emails reveal secret talks between officials before an auditor's damning report was softened—was justice compromised?

The image shows a page from a book with a drawing of a building, which appears to be a construction...
The image shows a page from a book with a drawing of a building, which appears to be a construction plan for a bridge. The drawing is detailed and shows the various components of the bridge, such as the beams, cables, and other structural components. The text accompanying the drawing provides further information about the construction plan.

Leverkusen Bridge scandal deepens as auditor's report revisions spark bias claims

A dispute has emerged over changes made to an auditor’s report on the troubled Leverkusen Bridge project. The construction faced major setbacks after faulty Chinese steel components were supplied by contractor Porr. Now, emails reveal coordination between state and federal officials before the report’s final version was published.

At the centre of the issue is the auditor’s legal duty to remain impartial—yet his revisions have drawn criticism from opposition politicians.

The Leverkusen Bridge project ran into serious problems when Porr’s steel parts proved defective. In 2020, the North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) transport authority, Straßen.NRW, terminated the firm’s contract over the flaws.

An early draft of the auditor’s report had stated that significant defects in key components were 'to be expected'. However, the final version changed this to confirm that such flaws had 'been confirmed'. The auditor later described these alterations as mere 'clarifications' and 'editorial adjustments'. Emails obtained by the press show that the NRW Transport Ministry discussed legal strategy with State Secretary Hendrik Schulte. One message stressed the need to make preparations 'as watertight as possible' for a potential 'termination for cause' in court. The ministry also confirmed it was coordinating with the Federal Transport Ministry on the matter. The auditor admitted to incorporating changes suggested by the federal ministry into his report. While Martin Metz of the governing Green Party dismissed concerns, calling the process standard procedure, the opposition SPD condemned it. A party spokesperson likened the situation to a referee secretly coordinating tactics with one team before a match.

The auditor’s report remains a key document in the legal fallout from the bridge’s construction failures. His revisions, made after discussions with federal officials, have raised questions about impartiality. The case now hinges on whether the changes were truly minor clarifications—or evidence of improper influence.

Read also:

Latest