Pensioner convicted of incitement for posting negatively about migrants in the latest politically charged German speech prosecution

If her conviction is not overturned, the woman will probably not live long enough to pay off her enormous fines.

Doris van Geul with her defence attorney at the Düsseldorf District Court. Photo from Cicero.

My routine has been cast into chaos the past several days by builders, so I have only this brief and sad story to offer you, via Peter Hammelrath at Achgut and Ferdinand Knauss at Cicero.

It is about Doris van Geul, a 74 year-old German pensioner who used to have a Facebook account. That is in itself dangerous in Germany, if – like van Geul – you are wont to comment on political matters.

On 8 October 2023, van Geul encountered an image of our Green Economics Minister Robert Habeck on Facebook. In this image, Habeck was quoted saying that “Germany depends on immigration to meet its labour needs.” Van Geul commented as follows:

Blah, blah, blah. We need skilled workers, not asylum seekers who just want a good life here without respecting our values and culture. Send the ones who are here off to work. We don’t need loafers and freeloaders, and certainly not stabbers and rapists.

For these comments, the Düsseldorf Public Prosecutor charged van Geul with the crime of incitement, and last week, the District Court finally took up her case. The indictment accused her of “inciting hatred in a manner likely to disturb the public peace.” Van Geul responded that she only meant to express her anger at Habeck’s statements, particularly in light of high native German unemployment. She moreover said that she had “overshot the mark” with her words and expressed herself “a bit intensely.” She even apologised for saying these simple words that in any sane country would require no apology.

Incredibly, the prosecutor objected that “it sounds as if [she] still doesn’t approve of [migration] policies,” and in closing arguments even opined that her “massive political critique” should increase her culpability. He further argued that her words were “anti-democratic” and could “cause division among the people.” Van Geul’s defence attorney pled that her political opinions are widely held in Germany and that “an ordinary citizen must be allowed to express herself in this way.”

The judge then found van Geul guilty of incitement, and sentenced her to a fine of 7,950 Euros. He said her Facebook comment “addressed … people who have already come to Germany as asylum seekers,” and in this way spoke of “a part of the population … in such a way as to incite hatred.” The judge acknowledged that German society harbours many “fears and reservations” regarding asylum seekers, and also that van Geul’s statement closely echoes “these reservations and the media discourse surrounding them.” He nevertheless asserted that these reservations are “false” – in this way outright denying the objective fact that migrants to Germany do in fact stab, rape and draw unemployment benefits at rates far above that of native Germans. Van Geul has the wrong opinions, and she must be punished for them.

This is van Geul’s second speech offence. In 2022, she was convicted under our lèse majesté statute of “malicious gossip against a person in public life,” apparently for merely sharing an article that portrayed Green Party politicians in a negative light. (No details about this earlier case are publicly available, this is van Geul’s own account). If our pensioner’s conviction is not overturned on appeal, she will likely be paying off her fines for the rest of her life. The poor woman lives on a monthly pension of 1,600 Euro, and the 50 Euro monthly instalments will continue until she is 93.