Disturbing Public Peace
After the riots in Hamburg on the occasion of the G20 summit in July 2017 the authorities were under intense pressure: Thousands of investigations followed, as well as public calls for denunciation, the publishing of photos of hundreds of wanted persons, several - partly trans-national - waves of house-searches and now also international arrest warrants and extraditions (in October a comrade was arrested in France and transferred to Germany) were launched. The revenge of the Justice system is targeting also those who continue to defend the rioting and keep on antagonizing the state after the turbulent weekend in Hamburg.
This May the anarchist library Kalabalik in Berlin as well as two private flats got searched by the cops to prosecute the pasting of a poster, which showed the photos of some politicians in Hamburg, some G20 responsibles and some cops in the style of a “wanted terrorists” poster. In August a trial took place against a comrade who was accused of pasting a poster. The prosecution assessed this as a “disturbance of public peace” and attempted to prosecute the pasting as a “particularly serious case of civil disorder”, since the poster was not only approving of the rioting, but also calling to reproduce it. As a result in Berlin several events and discussions were taking place around the topic of how the state can be faced with an offensive attitude in the context of repression and trials. Thus it was attempted to tackle the trial on a collective level to not put the question of guilt or innocence, conviction or acquittal in the center of attention, but to put the focus rather on the strength and complicity which can grow out of a common process of action and discussion. Only those can create the circumstances which give us the courage and determination to encounter the state offensively and minimize the fear of consequences which this can result in. So the posters kept on appearing on the streets of Berlin and different calls were published to be present during the trial which unexpectedly even ended with a discharge.
This declaration was read out at the beginning of the trial:
For me, the court, this building of authority, is not a meaningful setting for anarchist and revolutionary confrontation with domination. The struggles for a world without exploiters and exploited take place in everyday life and on the streets. A trial is an imposed snapshot that seeks to weaken current and past struggles and to deprive them of their fellow combatants.
In a way, however, I involve myself with this juridical spectacle by sitting in the dock today. I could have simply paid the fixed fine to avoid this trial. But to pay for what? I am here today to create a certain publicity that should show that state repression can be counteracted by combative deeds. Therefore, it is not my intention to negotiate with the prosecutor and to enter into the discourse of innocence or guilt. It is perfectly clear to me that if I am convicted - as in principle is true for all accused - I will be convicted as an example, to deter others from committing the reproached deeds. I doubt that in this case the intent of overall repression and oppression will have an effect, because I do not feel attacked as a person, but mainly for my idea of a human coexistence without any domination. But this idea does not solely belong to me. Thousands of comrades showed this clearly in July 2017 in Hamburg - among other dates - where for a brief moment state control has failed altogether, despite massive security measures. During this moment, the will to create a rupture with the existing order has moved and inspired many people to act in solidarity.
That today a public prosecutor will judge me, is to me an admission of the vulnerability of the state. In that sense, I'm certainly not the one who is justifying himself with this trial and judgment, but you: who must defend your blood-soaked power and submission to the state and capital!
Because of my views, I certainly do not insist on the right to freedom of expression, because the language of the law is not mine. Accordingly, I expect and demand nothing from this court and its servants, because as I have already said: the struggles for a liberated society and against the existing order will be fought elsewhere.