The European Parliament hears the Ulm5 case
On June 9th and 10th, a small delegation of families and a lawyer of the Ulm5 were invited to the EU Parliament in Brussels by the Spanish Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Jaume Asens to discuss the detention conditions of the Ulm5 and the show trial to which they are being subjected.
On the first day, they held a press conference in Parliament where Jaume Asens, also a criminal lawyer, clearly stated it should be German Chancellor Merz (and in my opinion, by extension the current and past German government) who should sit on the accused bench, not Vi, Crow, Daniel, Leandra, and Zo.
Mathes Breuer, lawyer for Leandra, explained the irregularities of the trial. Nicky Robertson, mother of Zo, gave a deeply affecting account of the harrowing conditions of detention, moving many to tears. A series of meetings between MEPs and the delegation followed the press conference, with most showing their disapproval and disgust that this trial is happening in a country that sells itself as a democracy. However, none were surprised that a country actively supporting genocide and blocking almost every EU resolution to hold Israel accountable would go to such lengths to repress dissent.
Trial Day 6 – reasons, refusals, and a cleared courtroom
On Monday 15th of June, the show trial resumed. Rounds of chanting and a now-customary standing ovation greeted the activists as they entered the courtroom. As the Ulm5 gave their opening statements during a previous trial date, the lawyers promptly filed a motion to release them on bail, arguing that they do not pose any danger to society.
The motion was rejected on the grounds that Palestine Action is nowhere and everywhere and might help them flee – even though the defendants had waited for the police to arrest them. Presiding judge Kathrin Lauchstädt offered further vague justifications, and when the lawyers asked the state prosecutor whether these were really reasons, he simply replied, deadpan: “well, they are reasons.”
The day moved through a familiar series of denials from judge Lauchstädt: requests for the defendants to be able to sit with their lawyers, for the defence to have someone take notes for them, and for permission for the public to write – because pens are potential stabbing tools in the hands of a rowdy public, despite the 2.5-metre-high glass security barrier. The lawyers responded with a motion to allow writing materials approved for kindergartens – materials we could not even choke on if we wanted – which to everyone’s surprise, was denied as well.
After further discussion, the Ulm5 lawyers repeatedly asked for breaks to confer with the defendants confidentially. Following more denials, one lawyer gave a passionate speech, asking the other four judges if they agreed with these denials and asked their opinion. Some of the public responded, stomping their feet, until the presiding judge cleared the room of everyone except the press, barring the public from returning for the day.
People came from across Germany, the UK and Ireland; some waiting outside for hours hoping to get in. Leandra once again stole the show, asking why she was being treated like a dangerous criminal despite never harming anyone. The judge, again, framed it as a matter of her “reasons.” The lawyers ended by stating they intend to seek the judge’s recusal for expelling the public from a public hearing.
Trial Day 7 – moving testimony, comical ‘evidence’
The next day of trial, Friday the 19th, began with a five minute long standing ovation and fresh chants. The judge spotted some contraband pens among the audience and promptly ordered heavily equipped security personnel to confiscate them– prompting one lawyer to remark, with more irony that the court could manage to summon in a year, “Thank you Judge. Now I feel much safer.”
Then, the game of motions started again: the typical motions which get rejected every time, plus some new ones. One motion addressed the invasive searches amounting to sexual assault that some female members of the public suffered a few weeks ago during security checks. Another motion requested a recording or transcript of what the Ulm5 were saying, what is said to them, and how it was translated. Translation errors aren’t unusual, and in a trial, they can be decisive. We will have to wait on the edge of our seats to see whether the judge rejects that motion too.
One motion was incredibly moving: the defence sought to present the report ‘What the wounds are telling us’ by Maud Effting und Willen Feenstra, which recently won the European Press Prize. It was granted, so the court heard doctors’ detailed descriptions of the injuries inflicted on children in Gaza – injuries confirmed to be 100% deliberate, not collateral damage. The material was so affecting that the translator struggled to keep her composure, with her voice breaking in places and a few mistakes slipping through (which coincidentally underlined exactly why the transcript motion matters). While the Ulm5 cried, prosecutor Stengel and Judge Lauchstädt appeared unmoved.
After the lunch break, the prosecution treated the courtroom to the longest, dullest unboxing video imaginable, presented as “proof.” The 90-minute video – described as “uncut” by the police but clearly worked over – started with something that resembled a pretentious, artsy video (the kind that only makes sense when high, and even then, not for long).
Eventually, it shifted to a CSI style four-way split screen: footage filmed by the Ulm5 themselves and from two security cameras outside the Elbit facilities. We got to watch the whole video that the 5 filmed. It was boring, and also unintentionally hilarious, mainly because it documented the opposite of a coordinated and organised operation. There were endless boxes opened and their contents taken care of, with a kind of improvisational randomness to their actions and their commentary that got laughs from the public but made the Ulm5 – behind the glass – end up watching some of the funniest moments through their fingers.
One of the most unexpectedly amusing moments came early on, when an unidentified person, moving quickly and audibly out of breath, remarks that they really have to stop smoking. The courtroom laughed and the judge snapped at us to be quiet. One lawyer replied that the courtroom is not a military barrack and she is not our commander, to which the judge answered, “doch.” This exchange gave basis for the lawyers to announce yet another motion for the judge’s recusal.
Watching the video didn’t strengthen the prosecution’s case. Instead, the video simply proves that this trial is all a farce. This is a political reaction from the German state to dissent and humanity, in a country hellbent on eternal wars and genocide.
Further Reading:
- Press release from families and loved ones of the Ulm5 – 22nd June 2026, Stuttgart
- Stuttgart Regional Court states falsehoods; Defence criticises brutal measures imposed on the public; Court confronted with the situation in Gaza; Presiding Judge Kathrin Lauchstädt sees herself as sergeant-major presiding over a barracks. Press release: Defence Team of the Ulm5 from 19th June 2026
