Sedition from a flawless Democrat? The Munich District Court found that this case also exists. Now Bernd Schreyer has to pay a fine.
Last year in June, Green City Councilor Bernd Schreyer (72) resigned from his seat because of a Holocaust comparison. Yesterday, the Munich District Court convicted him of incitement to hatred: Because in a post on the Internet platform Twitter (now Pay 100 euros. “The basic consensus of 'Never Again' is shaken when you compare everything in this way,” said judge Sonja Öttl, among other things, in justifying the verdict.
“Although there was never a ban on heating, it was possible to incite people against the Greens as if they were d. 'new Jews' who must be 'exterminated' in order to bring all happiness and prosperity back to Germany" - that was part of the post (including punctuation errors) that Schreyer posted. However, he did not mean normal criticism of the heating law, nor did he mean the Holocaust as a comparison, the politician said about the accusation. Rather, he meant hateful agitation à la “Hang the Greens while there are still trees” and, on the other hand, had the general anti-Semitic mood in the 19th and 20th centuries in mind as a parallel. In addition, Schreyer stated - like his defense attorney Jerzy Montag later in a one-hour, highly political speech - that as a politician and city employee he had always been committed to fighting anti-Semitism and supporting the free, democratic basic order. Montag, who used to be a well-known Green Party politician, also criticized the fact that the matter was handled by the K 44 criminal department, which is responsible for right-wing extremist crimes. “My client, as a Green, is known to be left-wing,” he said, “and now he should be placed in the right-wing extremist corner.” But at least the prosecutor did not accept this as a factual argument. “The fact that the Greens are left-wing is just your opinion, Mr. Defense Attorney,” stated the senior public prosecutor.
The judge ultimately did not follow Schreyer's explanations of what his post was actually meant - which was crucial for the guilty verdict. The word “eradicate” in particular clearly refers to the extermination of Jews during the Nazi era, she found. On the other hand, she commented on the argument of impeccable constitutional biography during the verdict: “I know that this hurts you. But even someone who has always had both feet on the ground of the democratic order can commit sedition if he oversteps the mark in a single case.” Now Schreyer and his defense attorney want to appeal.