The supervisory board of the club's football management addressed recent media reports about Stefan Kuntz's departure as a board member on December 31, 2025.
The statements made by Stefan Kuntz regarding the reasons for his departure necessitate corrections, as stated in a club release issued this afternoon:
1. Credible evidence of serious breaches of duty: The misconduct, independently described by several whistleblowers and leading to internal investigations, comprises numerous serious breaches of duty that would have warranted swift action by the supervisory board, given employment-law deadlines and the responsibility to protect employees and the organization’s values.
2. Multiple offers of hearings/information about the allegations: The repeated claim that Stefan Kuntz was not informed about the allegations against him and was not given the opportunity to refute them is demonstrably false. On December 18, he was formally informed about the investigation; on December 19, his then-lawyers were informed in anonymized form of the contents of all witness statements available at that time. After he announced on December 20 that he wished to make a statement, his lawyers offered two hearing dates (December 22/23), which were declined. Subsequently, at his request, two further specific hearing dates were proposed by December 27 but were postponed or canceled by him or his lawyers. On December 27, he informed of a change in his legal counsel and requested a hearing date on December 29, which was confirmed. On the eve of this hearing, he, through his lawyers, announced that he would not attend and preferred to use the date to negotiate a termination agreement. He did not attend the hearing. At this hearing, his new lawyers were offered the opportunity to reiterate the allegations in detail, but declined, stating they were already aware of them.
3. Stefan Kuntz's choice: It is not true that it was said to him that attending the hearing could make the allegations public. He was told that an amicable termination could avoid a lengthy and potentially public investigation. Based on this information and advice from several lawyers, Stefan Kuntz voluntarily decided to enter into the termination agreement. In this context, he proposed withdrawing his criminal complaint through his lawyers so that his wish for a discreet separation would not be thwarted. The content of this criminal complaint, which was received on December 30, is demonstrably false, at least in part.
The supervisory board regards these public corrections as regrettable in the interest of all affected parties and says it will not disclose the specific breaches identified or comment on third-party media reports about other matters.
0 Comments