Federal Constitutional Court: Germany is not complicit in drone attacks!

Federal Constitutional Court: Germany is not complicit in drone attacks!

In a landmark ruling, the Federal Constitutional Court Today, July 15, 2025, a constitutional complaint from two Yemeni citizens against Germany was rejected. The plaintiffs based their lawsuit on a US drone attack in August 2012 in which several civilians were killed, including relatives of the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs claimed that the drone attacks, which were carried out from the air base in Ramstein, were contrary to international law because the USA did not sufficiently distinguish between civilians and terrorists. The case raises crucial questions about German co-responsibility and duty to protect foreign citizens, especially in a context in which German military bases play an international role.

Germany's role in US drone operations

Ramstein is seen as a central hub for controlling drones. The control signal is transferred to Ramstein via an underwater fiber optic network and then via satellite to Yemen, where the operations take place. However, the federal government does not see any shared responsibility because it only passes on technical data and is not directly involved in the military operations. daily news reports that the administration has already taken steps to ensure U.S. compliance with international law.

The court made it clear that Germany fundamentally has a mandate to protect human rights, which also applies to foreign relations. However, two conditions must be met for this to happen: a sufficient connection to German state authority and the serious risk that international law will be systematically violated. In this specific case, the court saw no such connection and dismissed the complaint as unfounded.

Criticism of US drone attacks and the political dimension

The decision has far-reaching political and legal implications, particularly regarding relations with the USA. The lawsuit raises public questions about whether German fundamental rights also apply to people in Yemen and what obligations Germany has with regard to protection obligations towards foreigners. The S.R info News highlights that the political discussion about the use of Ramstein and Germany's role in international law is likely to remain intense.

The court regretted that the plaintiffs had failed to adequately demonstrate that there was a serious risk of systematic violations of international law by the United States. This decision could lead to further rejection of similar lawsuits against the Federal Republic of Germany in the future, which could have a negative impact on the legal situation for the Yemeni population.

It remains to be seen how the legal framework will be shaped in the future. What is certain is that the issue of drone attacks and Germany's associated responsibility will remain high in the political debate.