Trial in Haßfurt: 64-year-old accused of Nazi salutes!

Trial in Haßfurt: 64-year-old accused of Nazi salutes!

In Lower Franconia, a 64-year-old man once again attracted public attention when he appeared before the Haßfurt district court. The charges against him are anything but easy: Several allegedly unconstitutional content that he spread on Platform X, formerly Twitter, is under scrutiny. Antenna.de reports that there are, among other things, images with a Nazi connection and comments on current political issues that are classified as extremely problematic.

A particularly spicy post shows a picture of Adolf Hitler shaking hands with a clergyman, surrounded by men giving the Hitler salute. An edited cover of the magazine “Spiegel”, on which the leader of the Green Party, Katharina Schulze, is shown giving a Hitler salute, also caused a stir. It is written there unmistakably: “the green empire” and “the seizure of power”. Such statements raise not only moral but also legal questions.

Accusations and legal disputes

At the beginning of the hearing, the defense attorney filed a motion to impeach the presiding judge. The hearing was then adjourned to decide on this application before resuming in the afternoon. The background to the prosecution is an objection by the accused against a penalty order that imposed 90 daily rates on him for using the symbols of unconstitutional organizations and incitement to hatred.

In the course of the investigation, which began in August 2024, a post was also shown in which the former Federal Minister of Economics Robert Habeck was insulted as a “moron professional”. This led to a search which resulted in the seizure of a tablet on which further potentially criminal content was secured. It is interesting that the investigation against the man because of the Habeck post was temporarily discontinued because this accusation was viewed as less serious.

The balance between freedom of expression and incitement

The legal disputes shed light on a central point in German jurisprudence: the balance between freedom of expression and criminal liability for incitement to hatred. The Federal Constitutional Court has repeatedly emphasized the importance of taking into account the context and ambiguity of statements in order to avoid possible violations of freedom of expression. In a recent ruling, the judges made it clear that a conviction is only permissible if interpretations are not only possible but can also be ruled out. LTO highlights that careful consideration of the context of statements is essential.

The legislation, in particular Section 130 of the Criminal Code on incitement to hatred, and the desired freedom of expression in accordance with Article 5 of the Basic Law are in an area of ​​tension. This was also made clear in a ruling by the Bavarian Supreme Court, which confirmed that criminal sanctions must always be viewed in the light of freedom of expression. In the case, the court decided that a defendant who publicly compared unvaccinated people to the November pogroms could not be convicted because his statements also allowed for different interpretations. Ferner-Alsdorf discussed that the courts need to act more cautiously here.

How this will affect the current case remains to be seen. The 64-year-old faces a difficult defense and public perception could also influence his argument. The balance between freedom of expression and protection against sedition will remain a delicate issue.