Björn Höcke Trial: Defense Lawyer Attempts to Delay Proceedings with Secret Political Justice Tactics

Defense lawyer: “Defend secret political justice”

So does Höcke or his defense intend to use such measures to delay the trial? Anyway, Höcke’s lawyers spend the first day of the trial making various moves – before the conviction is read out. Immediately after the opening of the proceedings and the request for personal details, the lawyer Müller requests that the entire main hearing be recorded with audio. This is necessary to ensure that the accused receives a fair trial in accordance with Article 20 of the Basic Law in conjunction with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). A reasonable, fact-based presentation and clear preservation of evidence is required in any subsequent proceedings.

It cannot be avoided that secret recordings would be made by journalists and that reports would occur without distinction. The German media landscape was already determined before the proceedings began. You will hardly find any citizens – including judges – who oppose Höcke impartially and have to face a secret political justice system. Although legal audio recording is not a valid law, there is nothing that stands for it.

The court saw it differently and rejected the claim. First by order, if the defense objected after a breach, and finally by court order. The reasoning remained the same: the requirements of Section 169 Paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Court Act (GVG), according to which the main hearing can be started for scientific and historical reasons if it is of great importance, have not been met . There is also no indication that there would be any threat to the fair procedure. This ultimately follows the opinion of the public prosecutor’s office, which previously described the application as a “beautifully packaged opening statement” and indicated that the procedural rights of the protected by several StPO standards. In addition, pleas are not considered before the conviction is read in accordance with Section 243 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

A defense attorney interrupts the prosecutor as the charges are read out.

The prosecutor Benedikt Bernzen immediately starts to do the same, but after a few words he is stopped by the defense lawyer Dr. Vosgerau stopped him. He appeals against the court’s decision to reject it. He also criticizes the members of the court: the proceedings belong to the district court. The OLG Naumburg had previously decided on a complaint from the public prosecutor’s officethat the cases should be heard before the Halle Regional Court instead of the Merseburg District Court due to the “special importance of the case”. This is possible according to Section 24 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 3 GVG. However, the defense goes against the constitutionality of this level and proposes a normal concrete review according to Article 100 of the Basic Law.

At the same time, the public prosecutor Bernzen seems to be shocked after another breach caused by this lawyer’s argument. “You’ve gone back on my word, that’s terrible,” he turns to Dr.’s defense attorney. Shelters. That had never happened to him before. Furthermore, the complaint is not allowed and the current procedure is not the right place to review Section 24 GVG.

When Vosgerau then says that it is understandable that the public prosecutor’s office has “failed”, but that this is not the result of the requests, the presiding judge Jan Stengel warns him to be stable. Vosgerau, on the other hand, believes that his personal rights were violated by the public prosecutor. However, another claim does not follow.

Instead, after another break, the court ruled that the complaint was inadmissible. However, the defendant can turn to the Federal Constitutional Court without prejudice. More than four hours after the trial began, the charges were finally read. There is no new information.

Höcke wants to testify

Finally, President Höcke suggests that it would be better to hire a public defender for his “lawyer carousel” and asks the eagerly awaited question to the person who is accused. It is clear then that Höcke basically wants to get involved.

It is not clear if this will happen on the next day of the hearing on April 23, 2024. According to the media spokesperson, a police officer has been invited as a witness for this meeting. The public prosecutor’s office has also already announced that they want to investigate a video of the appearance in Gera. Regardless of the separation of proceedings, this should be recognized as appropriate behavior late at night which could have a more serious impact on the punishment – at the time of the second incident in December 2023. the first charge by the public prosecutor already built. A fact that could influence a controversial acceptance of the resolution, at least for the reports in Gera.

Three other hearing dates were initially scheduled for the proceedings. However, the “carousel ride” may be longer than expected. Based on the assumption that “the other dates may be similar to what they have been now,” the public prosecutor Bernzen finally recommends agreeing to additional trial days. And on this point, for the first time, everyone involved in the process agrees.