Case 10
| Case Number | 10 |
| Charge | Theft |
| Defense Attorney Present | No |
| Interpreter Present | Yes |
| Racialized Person | Yes |
| Outcome | Fine |
In a trial lasting five minutes, a couple, relatively new to Germany and seeking asylum, are sentenced to a €200 fine for theft of about €30 of food items.
One can see the assembly-line nature of the sentencing of low-level cases: This trial lasted only five minutes; the two people tried have no attorney and seemingly not-so-accurate interpretation. The judge’s recitation of the proportionality of the fine seems pro forma rather than deeply considered; she also does not follow up with the defendants’ request for a payment plan. In the end, the judge sentences them to €200, which is nearly half of the couple’s monthly income (and they have a child). If they do not pay, they will be jailed.
Here too, the motivation for stealing food is completely ignored. With a total monthly income of €500, the couple and child each have €5.55 to spend per day. This must be used to pay not only for food, but also for other needs outside of their rent. In calculating the standard rate for Bürgergeld, the legislator assumes that an adult needs at least €6.42 per day, and children between €3.85 and €5.03, for food alone. At the same time, human rights organizations as well as the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have criticized this sum (which is more than the couple has) as insufficient. The additional fine only exacerbates the family’s situation. The judge also completely ignores the fact that the fine inevitably also punishes the family’s child.
One of our courtwatchers noted that the woman being tried appeared defiant. This was her first case so she could not have been too familiar with what to expect but perhaps she already had a keen sense for the injustice of the punishment system.
A couple is charged with theft of food items valued at €30. While they are provided with an interpreter, they do not have the assistance of counsel.
The judge asks the couple if they would like to say anything about the allegations. The woman says that they are very sorry and that they had no money, adding that it will not happen again. There is a bit of confusion over exactly which government source their income is from; we learn that the couple receives approximately €500/month for themselves and their child.
Based on this quick exchange, the prosecutor suggests a fine of €200. The accused woman asks if they can pay on a payment plan because they do not have any money with them today. The judge responds that they will not be required to pay today and will receive a bill in the mail. She then confirms the sentence as €200 fine, dismissing the couple.
Cases from our archive
Case 23
A woman comes to Germany for health treatment, her family collecting thousands of euros to prepay costs and secure a visa. A federal agency accuses her of forging identity documents. Despite the prosecution admitting lack of evidence for intentional deception and requesting acquittal, the court sentences her to a harsh fine, jeopardizing both her stay in Germany and her health.
Case 22
A man is held in pretrial detention for months and sentenced to a fine of several thousand euros for selling cannabis. Although at the time of the trial, the legalization of cannabis consumption and further decriminalization of possession and supply is imminent, the court strongly condemns the defendant's actions. The prosecutor described them as “extremely reprehensible”.
Case 21
The court puts pressure on a man to revoke his appeal of a conviction for resisting arrest and assault of police. Despite the defendant’s distress, the judge appears uninterested in the man’s account of the alleged offense. The outcome–no relief for the defendant–appears predetermined by the judge, prosecutor, and the defendant’s attorney.
Case 20
Three young defendants are summoned to fast-track proceedings (Schnellgericht) for a low-level theft case. Because the court has not lined up an interpreter for one of them, he will not be heard and instead will be sentenced with summary proceedings (Strafbefehl), meaning he will receive his sentence in the mail. After a quick hearing, the other two are each punished with €600 fines.
Perspectives
Jailing people for unpaid fines is about more than punishing poverty
Carmen Grimm, Bündnis zur Abschaffung der Ersatzfreiheitsstrafe
The Coalition for the Abolition of Debtor's Prisons argues that the jailing of people for unpaid debt not only discriminates against people for their poverty, it is the end effect of systemic racism in the criminal legal system, starting with racial profiling.
Refugees in Germany: The omnipresent border regime
Britta Rabe, Grundrechtekomitee
When people reach EU territory alive after fleeing through the desert, over sea and land, and have survived pushbacks, beatings and perhaps even torture, they are also confronted with an exclusionary system within Fortress Europe that makes their arrival difficult or even impossible in many ways. They have to realize that the EU border regime extends all the way into Germany. Borders permeate our societies invisibly, but tangibly for those they exclude.