Icon: enlarge
Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia: "Protecting Private Individuals"
Photo: Patrick Seeger / DPA
A few weeks ago, Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia proudly referred to the deeds of an ancestor.
On the 150th anniversary of the founding of the German Empire on January 18, 1871, today's Hohenzollern boss hailed the unification of the German Empire, which Wilhelm, his great great Europe, had brought about.
At that time a "dream" had come true for most Germans.
As a praiseworthy quality of the new empire, he listed that it was a »constitutional state«.
It can be assumed that Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia knows what he is talking about.
Because he and his lawyer use the rules of the constitutional state to the limits of what is bearable.
They have long been taking legal action against historians, journalists and politicians who, in their opinion, are spreading false statements of fact.
About a year ago, the Prince of Prussia told the "Welt am Sonntag" the number of 120 cases.
More have been added since then, the exact number is unknown.
On his website he explains that one of the "tasks of the constitutional state is to protect private individuals from disinformation and its consequences."
Most of the disputes are about details from his settlement negotiations with the federal states of Berlin and Brandenburg as well as the federal government.
The Hohenzollern claimed several thousand works of art from public institutions, demanded compensation for real estate that had been expropriated by the Soviets after 1945 in what was later to become the GDR, and temporarily demanded a right of residence in the Cecilienhof Palace in Potsdam.
But there are also other points, such as the history policy of the Hohenzollerns.
Is a large part of the estate of the last German Crown Prince Wilhelm in private archives of the Hohenzollern that are not publicly accessible?
The Prince of Prussia has so far successfully denied this in court.
Even the smallest inaccuracies are tracked.
When the “Potsdamer Neuesten Nachrichten” recently claimed that the Hohenzollern had filed a request for an injunction against the scientist because of a contribution by a historian in the “Frankfurter Allgemeine”, the publisher received a mail from the lawyer.
In fact, the Prince of Prussia did not act against the historian, but against the "Frankfurter Allgemeine".
As if it mattered.
Criminal charges against scientists
For a long time, the Prince of Prussia seemed to be rushing from victory to victory with his injunctive relief, and he was once successful against SPIEGEL as well.
But now he has also suffered defeats.
The Berlin Court of Appeal provisionally ruled that the state chairwoman of the Left in Brandenburg, Anja Mayer, was trying to "stifle scientific research and public discussion about the role of the House of Hohenzollern by legal means";
from their point of view this represents an "attack on the core values of our democracy - the freedom of science and the media".
How differently from the politician should one interpret what happened between the Prince of Prussia and the historian Stephan Malinowski?
In 2014, the state of Brandenburg commissioned the researcher to prepare an expert opinion on the question of whether the great-grandfather of Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia had once "made a significant contribution" to National Socialism.
Malinowski answers the question in the affirmative;
the Hohenzollerns deny it.
Malinowski then reported in a newspaper article about the process and his research, whereupon the Prince of Prussia filed a criminal complaint against the scientist because he had "revealed private secrets".
The Hamburg public prosecutor finally dropped the case.
Litigation has now also had political consequences.
The state governments in Berlin and Potsdam and the federal government are closely monitoring the legal disputes.
On the one hand, politicians like Brandenburg's Science Minister Manja Schüle (SPD) do not want to continue the talks while there are lawsuits against historians on the table.
She does not want to "negotiate with someone who tries to intimidate scientists with lawsuits," said Schüle.
Chief negotiator Aretz does not take the truth very seriously
On the other hand, Prince of Prussia has legally targeted the Greens and the Left, although he depends on their consent in the negotiations, because both of them co-govern in Berlin and the Greens in Brandenburg.
In view of such angry complaints, it is not surprising that the emperor's descendant has obviously lost track of things.
As SPIEGEL and "Tagesspiegel" have found out, the Hohenzollern boss used affidavits from his chief negotiator Jürgen Aretz in the legal disputes, in which he is probably not so strict about the truth.
The two identical documents deal with negotiations with the public sector.
Prince of Prussia used one of the two affidavits in court against the historian Winfried Suss.
The other he uses in a legal dispute with the left in Brandenburg because of their popular initiative "No presents to the Hohenzollern!";
The Berlin Regional Court wants to deal with the matter on Thursday.
Icon: enlarge
Cecilienhof Palace in Potsdam
Photo: Soeren Stache / dpa
SPIEGEL and »Tagesspiegel« had independently revealed in 2019 what exactly the Hohenzollern wanted.
Now Aretz claims that both media had not given the opportunity to comment before publication - a weighty accusation under press law.
At that time there were inquiries to the Prince of Prussia himself ("Tagesspiegel") or his lawyer (SPIEGEL).
Then why did Aretz claim that there was no way of commenting?
In his opinion, that would have presupposed that the documents to which the inquiries related would have been disclosed, explains Aretz.
An argument that doesn't really seem compelling.
As a precaution, Aretz adds: It could not be a matter of false affidavits in the legal sense, because the inquiries were not of evidence in the litigation of the Prince of Prussia.
Which should mean something like: Even if the insurances were not correct at this point, it would not be criminally irrelevant, because it does not matter in the proceedings.
In terms of content, this can probably only be followed by lawyers.
Every layperson understands why it is practically important: false affidavits are sanctioned with fines or even imprisonment.
The head of the Hohenzollern family also announced on his website: "Anyone who creates 'alternative facts', says or writes untruths, has to answer for their allegations." A request from SPIEGEL as to whether they want to keep Aretz as negotiator went unanswered.
Icon: The mirror