BGH judges criticize statements in Kunduz case | free press

Unusual trial: Two BGH judges criticize the depiction of an airstrike by German forces in Afghanistan 12 years ago. You speak of a “propaganda success of the Taliban”.

Berlin (dpa) – Twelve years after the memorable airstrike in Kunduz, Afghanistan, two Federal Court of Justice (BGH) judges have expressed fundamental criticism for what they consider to be a misrepresentation of the facts.

“Unfortunately, the public image has established that on the orders of the German local commander a crowd of people were bombed without warning and more than 100 people were killed, many of them civilians and especially children,” writes the chairman of the BGH. , Ulrich Herrmann and BGH judge Harald Reiter in the “Neue Juristische Wochenschrift” (NJW 32/2021, p. 10).

“The propaganda success of the Taliban”

“This representation simply doesn’t add up in terms of the number and characteristics of the victims, as well as the alleged lack of warning and is ultimately based on a propaganda success by the Taliban.”

Publicly available sources “that give a reliable picture of the facts” were not used in reporting the case, the lawyers continue to write in the magazine’s readers’ forum. In the request to speak, which can be judged as unusual, they summarize the state of affairs from their point of view, but outside the circumstances in which it was legally relevant to their own decision in the case. “However, they are of great importance for the political evaluation and for the reputation of the Bundeswehr, so we need clarification,” said the two lawyers.

Related Articles

Back to top button