“Ulm 5” in court: “It seems like a show trial”

taz: Ms. Gohlke, you sit for the Left in the Bundestag. As a parliamentary observer, you were already at an “Ulm 5” trial in July. This is a group of five activists who are said to have broken into an Israeli arms company in Ulm. How do you remember the day?

Nicole Gohlke: It was bizarre. When the accused were led into the hall, the supporters sang for them to build them up morally. I found that very touching. And then there was this contrast: the courtroom in Stammheim, secured like in a high-security wing. The defendants in handcuffs and behind glass windows, as if they posed a danger.

taz: The defendants are said to have caused at least one million euros in damage. They are also said to be part of a criminal organization and to have spread anti-Semitic slogans. They are said to have sprayed “baby killer” on the house facade. These are serious allegations.

Gohlke: This is all absurd. Just because more than two people meet to do something doesn't make it a criminal organization. This applies to every politically active person and two of their friends. I think this exaggeration of the criminal law category is very, very dangerous. And it’s certainly not anti-Semitism to say “baby killer.”

was born in Munich in 1975 and was the top candidate for the Left in Bavaria in the 2021 federal election. She is currently deputy parliamentary group leader of the Left Party in the Bundestag.

taz: But you can also see it as an allusion to the anti-Semitic conspiracy narrative. Also known as the “ritual murder legend”. Don't you see any parallels?

Gohlke: In the case of Elbit Systems, it is demonstrably a company that produces armaments that Israel uses for warfare and genocide in the Gaza Strip. It has been proven that children and civilians have died on an unbelievable scale. Naming this, calling it anti-Semitism, just shows how crazy our debate has become.

taz: So from your point of view, is it okay to criticize in this way?

Gohlke: It's obviously a crime, one that they consciously chose and for which they are prepared to accept the consequences: They waited for the police on site and allowed themselves to be taken away without resistance. I would consider it a means of civil disobedience.

taz: The defense and civil rights organizations criticize that the procedure is not fair. How did you perceive the conditions of the trial?

Gohlke: The defendants are in a glass box; they have no direct contact with their defense lawyers. There are also language barriers and only two interpreters. Defense attorneys and defendants are totally handicapped in the courtroom. I have the feeling that you can't be sure that in the end this is a truly legal process. It seems like a show trial.

Gohlke: They are deliberately portrayed like the RAF defendants. It is acted as if people pose a threat to life and limb. This is about property damage. Obviously the intention is to set an example; how one wants to deal with Palestine solidarity protests in the future. It was also strange how I was treated there as a parliamentary observer.

Gohlke: Whenever I have registered with the court as a parliamentary observer for a trial, I have also received a promise that I will definitely be allowed into the courtroom. That wasn't the case this time. I didn't even get a response to my email. I couldn't take my pen with me on site.

taz: What do you hope to achieve from your presence?

Gohlke: That there is more publicity for the whole process. The media has reported very little so far. I hope that changes now.