At the end of the announcement, the chairman of the 3rd criminal senate recalled something fundamental.

Acquittals are "not a weakness", said Jürgen Schäfer.

Rather, it is a “great achievement and strength” of constitutional criminal proceedings that an accused can only be convicted if there are no “reasonable doubts” against it.

According to Schäfer, this is particularly true in political proceedings.

Then he added: "The yes to the rule of law is not divisible."

Marlene Grunert

Editor in Politics.

  • Follow I follow

The haunting words were preceded by a decision by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), which was to be expected and which is likely to disappoint many.

This applies in particular to the relatives of the murdered Kassel district president Walter Lübcke, who wanted to have the co-defendant Markus H. convicted.

The verdict should also be painful for Ahmed I.

He was the victim of an attempted murder, which will now in all probability remain unpunished.

The BGH rejected the appeals of the joint plaintiffs as well as those of all other parties involved in the proceedings.

The judgment of the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Frankfurt is therefore final.

First politician murder since RAF

At the end of January 2021, the right-wing extremist Stephan Ernst was found guilty of the murder of Walter Lübcke.

In addition, the State Protection Senate had determined the particular severity of the guilt and ordered preventive detention under reserve.

The Higher Regional Court considered it proven that Ernst sneaked onto Walter Lübcke's terrace on the night of June 2, 2019 and shot him.

In the CDU politician, Ernst saw a representative of the liberal refugee policy he hated, who wanted to send a public signal with the murder.

The murder of Walter Lübcke is considered the first murder of a politician in the Federal Republic since the RAF terror.

The judges in Frankfurt acquitted the other accused Markus H., Ernst's confidant from the right-wing extremist scene, on the main charge of aiding and abetting murder.

What remained was a suspended sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm, which H's lawyers appealed unsuccessfully.

The outcome of the Frankfurt proceedings was highly unsatisfactory for Walter Lübcke's relatives.

They are convinced that H. planned and carried out the murder together with Ernst, and that he should have been punished even as an accomplice.

The federal prosecutor's office, which had accused him of aiding and abetting, also opposed H's acquittal.

She also appealed to the BGH against Ernst's acquittal of the charge of attempted murder of Ahmed I.

No own evidence

However, the conditions under which a judgment is overturned there are strict - especially when, as here, it is about the core of judicial assessment of evidence.

The supreme court of ordinary jurisdiction is not a second “factual authority”.

It hears no witnesses, evaluates no leads, and does not take its own evidence.

That is a matter for the trial court.

The BGH adopts its findings on what happened.

Only the written judgment, which he checks for legal errors, is decisive for him.

The chairman had already emphasized this standard during the oral hearing, and he repeated it on Thursday.

False expectations should not arise.