Hamas propaganda and death threats online: Magistrates’ Court fines student

Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar: Zum deutschen Artikel.

The case centred, amongst other things, on the Middle East conflict, Hamas, a death threat against members of the government and a controversial slogan: a female student appeared before Leipzig Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, 29 September, to answer charges relating to several offences. Following a confession, the trial of the 31-year-old proceeded relatively smoothly. This was the court’s final ruling.

The Leipzig student, M., appeared in court on Tuesday to answer charges of defamation, making threats, insulting others, displaying symbols of unconstitutional and terrorist organisations, and resisting law enforcement officers.

A series of offences relating to the Middle East conflict

The representative of the public prosecutor’s office accused the 31-year-old of spreading the slogan “From the River to the Sea – Palestine will be free” online, displaying the so-called Hamas triangle and, at the end of 2024, addressing members of the then ‘traffic light’ coalition government on Instagram: “You sent blood money to your Nazi comrades in occupied Palestine at Christmas.” She concluded: “Step down, ask me for forgiveness, or you’ll get a bullet in the head.”

In addition to a series of further insults directed at third parties, M. is alleged to have resisted an identity check by the police on 22 March 2025 during a pro-Palestinian demonstration not far from the city centre. The student, who was working as a steward at the time, is alleged to have verbally abused and insulted officers in the process, after sticking her tongue out at them.

The defendant’s confession

The hearing at the magistrates’ court then proceeded relatively quickly on Tuesday, with witnesses being excused: following a consultation with her lawyer, M. admitted to all the charges. “I regret saying that,” the Egyptian-born student, who came to Germany a few years ago, stated through her defence lawyer, referring to the Instagram threat against members of the government.

During the demonstration in March 2025, she said, she had witnessed police searches and aggressive behaviour, whereupon she had sought to express her disapproval by sticking out her tongue: “After that, police officers approached me in an aggressive manner and demanded to see my identity card. What can one possibly do in such a difficult and nerve-wracking situation?” she stated.

Defence cites irrational behaviour on the part of the defendant

There was consensus amongst the court, the prosecution and the defence that several factors worked in M.’s favour: her confession, her awareness of having done wrong, her remorse, and the fact that she had no previous convictions. Furthermore, the defendant’s actions at the demonstration had, at the very least, arisen from an emotional and dynamic situation. Furthermore, the offences had now taken place some time ago.

M.’s lawyer also conceded that his client had behaved irrationally in the generally agitated atmosphere “against the backdrop of this vexing Middle East conflict”. The defence lawyer, who endeavoured to soften an overly negative portrayal of his client, argued that the threat of a “bullet to the head” – which was not meant seriously – was primarily a way of venting frustration: after all, she was now in a stable relationship and had come to terms with her sexual identity. “In a way, she has also found inner peace.”

Court follows prosecution’s recommendation

Magistrate Alexander Länge ultimately sentenced the defendant to 90 daily fines of 8 euros each, which was exactly in line with the prosecution’s request. The defence had not made any specific submission, but had called for a sentence “at the lower end of the scale”.

M. was found guilty of, amongst other things, making threats, causing offence and resisting law enforcement officers. The court had previously dismissed some of the charges. Officially, in Germany, a person is not considered to have a criminal record if they receive fewer than 91 daily fines, provided they are a first-time offender.