[Imc-communication] News from Berlin on the case against Andrej Holm

Thu Aug 30 23:39:00 UTC 2007

Hi,

great news: The Federal Court of Justice has decided yesterday not to
decide this week about the prosecutors complaint against the temporary
release from custody. Instead the judges seem to have realised that a
much more important issue is at stake: the question whether section
129a, the terrorism law, applies at all. Not only for Andrej's case (and
the other 6 concerned), but it is thinkable that this is going to turn
into a fundamental decision on the definition of 'terrorism' and whether
arson without hurting human beings can be 'terrorist'.

This is a great step for humanity (or may be) and at the same time will
be a very scary time for our family, and friends.

I'm sending you some English language material: an article from this
week's Der Spiegel (Germany's most influential weekly magazine), a press
release commenting on yesterday's court decision, a link to two shows on
National Public Radio and Free Speech Radio Network.
There's more at the English language section of
http://einstellung.so36.net/en

Please consider subscribing to our English language newsletter -  just
send an empty email to einstellung-news-subscribe at lists.so36.net.

Also we continue to depend on donations - please keep pointing people to
http://einstellung.so36.net/en/donations. For donations from outside
Europe we are trying to find an easier way than the typical European
money transfer: please contact einstellung at so36.net for details.

Anna
_________________

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,502178,00.html

IVORY TOWER ARSON ARREST
Berlin Struggles to Define 'Terror'

By Caroline Schmidt and Dietmar Hipp

Just what who is a terrorist? It is a question Germany is wrestling with
after a Berlin sociology professor was imprisoned for terrorism after
allegedly helping leftists torch cars.

Forty-year-old Berlin lawyer Christina Clemm was just 10 during the
so-called German Autumn of 1977: Her recollections of the historic
showdown between the German state and its enemies, the left-wing
underground organization known as the Red Army Faction or
"Baader-Meinhof Gang," are vague. But when Clemm visited her client,
36-year-old Andrej H., in Berlin's Moabit prison early last week, the
atmosphere there was reminiscent of those dark years of leftist terrorism.

The lawyer was only allowed to shake her client's hand in the presence
of a prison guard. A plate of bullet-proof glass an inch thick separated
them during their conversation. In addition, Clemm's mail was
intercepted. Andrej H. told her he was being held in solitary
confinement 23 hours a day. He was only allowed out for exercise for one
hour a day with two other prisoners. He is being held under paragraph
129a of German criminal law -- the paragraph that deals with terrorism.

And yet the academic -- who holds a Ph.D. in sociology, lectures at
Humboldt University in Berlin and has three children -- is not even a
prime suspect in the arson investigation that led to his arrest,
according to the warrant. The federal prosecutor's office believes H.
and an academic from Leipzig are the intellectual leaders of the
left-wing "militante gruppe" (mg), a left-wing faction which has
allegedly been responsible for about 25 arson attacks since 2001. Three
other men from Berlin have also been detained. They were seen trying to
place incendiary devices underneath trucks belonging to the German military.

How Far Can the State Go?

The move by the investigators to use all severity in dealing with such a
case is very likely a precedent -- and seems destined to trigger a
debate as to the appropriateness of the approach. The central questions
are clear: In the age of bloody suicide attacks, what constitutes
terrorism? And: How far can the state go?

More than 3,000 supporters, including academics from Germany and the
United States, have signed a letter of protest "Against the
Criminalization of Critical Science." Last week, renowned US
sociologists Saskia Sassen and Richard Sennett published an article
called "Guantánamo in Germany" in the British Guardian, in which they
write: "We are struck by the gray zones of fragile civil liberties and
confused state power that this case reveals."

The German Green Party has already said that Minister of Justice
Brigitte Zypries has some explaining to do and has promised to pursue
the issue in Germany's parliament, the Bundestag. Green Party Floor
Leader Renate Künast has criticized the investigation as "lacking a
legal basis." Former Bundestag Vice President Burkhard Hirsch, of the
liberal Free Democrats, spoke of an inappropriate attempt to turn small
militant groups into terrorists. "Torching a car is no small offense,"
was the brusque retort of Dieter Wiefelspütz, the domestic policy
spokesman for the Social Democrats. One could very well speak of
terrorism in such a case, Wiefelspütz added.

The bitter debate comes four years after a 2003 legal reform pushed
through by the government of then Chancellor Gerhard Schröder which
introduced new guidelines for the prosecution of terrorist acts. Coming
not long after the al-Qaida attacks in the US, the reform took aim at
international terrorist organizations -- and made the prosecution of
those groups much easier. At the same time, Schröder's SPD and his
coalition partners the Greens wanted to limit the application of terror
laws -- originally passed to deal with Red Army Faction attacks in the
1970s -- domestically. There were also European Union guidelines to take
into consideration.

Arson as Terror

Ever since, arson has only been punishable as terrorism when carried out
with the intention of "significantly intimidating the population" or
"eliminating or seriously damaging the foundations of a state or an
international organization." Moreover, attacks need to be capable of
causing "considerable" damage to the state. Jerzy Montag, one of the
Green Party's legal experts, praised the new law at the time by pointing
out that it makes it impossible to prosecute "every little thing" as a
case of terrorism.

But how do you know when a state is severely damaged? Is every
politically motivated crime equal to terrorism, or should the case of
Andrej H. be approached solely as attempted arson?

A lack of case law means that an authoritative answer to these questions
does not yet exist. The only relevant court decision was handed down by
the Federal Court of Justice in its decision that the "pinprick tactic"
of right-wing arsonists can be defined as terrorism -- because
right-wing arsons are carried out with the intention of driving "all
foreigners" out of the region. Cologne-based professor Claus Kress
believes that terrorism charges could be leveled against Andrej H. and
the other suspects as long as "more than only marginal elements of the
German military were destroyed." But, he adds, setting fire to single
vehicles is not enough.

Criminal law professor Thomas Weigend likewise finds fault with a broad
application of terror laws. In a letter to former head federal
prosecutor Kay Nehm, he found fault with the "excessive reach" of the
2003 law and called for a restrictive interpretation. An attack, he
wrote, should be classified as terrorist only when "the state in its
entirety suffers damage," as in the case of "large-scale attacks on the
energy supply," for example. Exceptions should be made only for extreme
violence against humans.

Unusually Sloppy

Even justices at the Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe, Germany's
highest appellate court, take this view. "Only limited effects with no
broader impact are not sufficient, according to the letter of the law,"
two magistrates at the Federal Court of Justice note. According to that
interpretation, the militante gruppe Andrej H. is accused of leading
wouldn't be a terrorist organization at all. Even if the left-wing
radicals have declared war on the state and have set fire to police
cars, job centers and a supermarket, they have taken care not to hurt
anybody. Contrary to the Red Army Faction, explosives or firearms are
not part of their weapons arsenal.

But what seems like an academic quibble is vital for the future of the
investigation into Andrej H's case. Only if the case is classified as
terrorism does it become part of Federal Prosecutor Monika Harms'
portfolio -- and only then can investigators make use of the full range
of surveillance measures. Most importantly, it is only then that alleged
behind-the-scenes conspirators can be prosecuted even when they have not
contributed to specific crimes in a tangible way -- as with Andrej H.
Investigators tapped his phone, traced his movements by following his
mobile phone signal, read his e-mails and maintained video surveillance
on both entrances to his house for almost a year.

If the arrest warrant issued by the Federal Court of Justice is to be
believed, these measures yielded little: Policemen saw the avowed G-8
critic meet with one of the alleged arsonists in a café in February and
April of this year. The meetings are said to have been arranged in
secret through the e-mail account "opelprolls at yahoo.de." The
investigators believe H. is the intellectual mastermind behind the group
because his dissertation on urban renewal features the word
"gentrification," which also appears in the communiqués of the
"militante gruppe."

Last week, Ulrich Hebenstreit, the judge overseeing Andrej H's
detention, carefully distanced himself from the initial accusations and
temporarily rescinded the unusually sloppy arrest warrant against Andrej
H. Hebenstreit argued that H. continues to be "strongly suspected of
having committed an offense," but that sufficient evidence "regarding
direct participation in one or more attacks by the 'militante gruppe' is
not yet extant."

______________________

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=13831842

Professor's Research Results in Terrorism Charges

All Things Considered, August 21, 2007 · Prominent German academic
Andrej Holm was arrested three weeks ago on terrorism charges. According
to the arrest warrant, Professor Holm was linked to a militant group
because of his research into "gentrification."

Robert Siegel talks with Kate Connolly, Berlin correspondent for The
Guardian newspaper.

[If you have trouble opening the file: I can send it to you and it will
soon also be here: http://einstellung.so36.net/en]

______________________

http://www.fsrn.org/news/20070823_news.html

Download
http://www.fsrn.org/news/audio/20070823hifi.mp3
Stream
http://www.fsrn.org/news/audio/20070823.ram

Critics Say Germany's Anti-Terrorism Laws Target Leftist Intellectuals
(3:46)

German sociologist Andrej Holm, was released on bail late yesterday,
after spending 3 weeks in jail on suspicion of being a member of a
terrorist organization. Holm was arrested under section 129a of
Germany's anti-terrorist legislation, because of his association with 3
other men who were arrested after allegedly attempting to set fire to a
military vehicle. The German Federal Police suspect that all these
people are members of a terrorist organisation known as the Militant
Group - and have been holding them in pre-trial detention under section
129a of the German Anti-Terrorism Law. Cinnamon Nippard has more from
Berlin.

_______________

Coalition for the Immediate End to the §129a Proceedings
c/o Haus der Demokratie und Menschenrechte e.V.
Greifswalder Strasse 4
D-10405 Berlin
Germany
einstellung[at]so36.net
http://einstellung.so36.net

Berlin, 30th August 2007

Press Release

Sociologist Remains Free. Federal Prosecution postpones the decision to
revoke temporary release

Yesterday afternoon the Third Criminal Division of the Federal Court of
Justice declared that the decision over the appeal against Andrej H.'s
temporary release from custody has been postponed until October.
According to the judge there are outstanding legal questions as to
whether the anti-terrorist legislation, the "Â§129a", can even be applied
to this case at all. The lawyers acting on behalf of Florian L., Oliver
R. and Axel H. believe that this discussion over the premises of the
charges will also have an effect on their clients' situation.

"The Federal Prosecution is completely lost over its construction of a
terrorist organisation", Volker Eick, a spokesperson for the Coalition
for the Immediate End to the 129a Proceedings, said. "The accusation of
terrorism against the three people arrested in Brandenburg is based upon
two meetings with Andrej H. Whatever is decided, we demand the immediate
release of Oliver, Florian and Axel", Eick added.

For Andrej H. the judge's decision means he will remain out of custody
until the beginning of October. "We are of the opinion that this will
continue to be the case because by October the claim that he may abscond
will be have been clearly shown to be false", Eick stated.

Further information in English:
http://einstellung.so36.net/en

Telephone number:
01577-4300652

Lawyer:
Christina Clemm
Tel.: +49-30-25293336

_____________________________________

-- 
Bitte benutzt meinen neuen GPG-Schluessel /
please use my new GPG key:

http://keys.indymedia.org/cgi-bin/lookup?op=get&search=DF54007A8BD027FC

Fingerprint
D8CA 5A27 CF02 D93E 8713 BB16 DF54 007A 8BD0 27FC

Please send me yours again!
Bitte schickt mir Eure Schluessel nochmal!

Protect your privacy / mehr Datenschutz:
http://cryptocd.org/online_version/
http://www.scroogle.org/

Das alles verhindert nicht, dass verschiedene Sicherheitsorgane des
Landes mitlesen, ich bitte also von Zusendungen mit den Stichworten
'Gentrifizierung' oder 'Inhalt der Schwarzen Tuete' abzusehen.

An die Damen und Herren von den Sicherheitsorganen: Letzteres war *Ironie*.