Press release from families & friends of the Ulm 5 with statements from the defence lawyers – 12th May 2026, Stuttgart-Stammheim
Second “Ulm 5” trial date shut down by judge; lawyers pursue defendants’ constitutional and human rights
Next scheduled trial date: 20th May 2026
11th May 2026 finally saw the second trial day for the ‘Ulm 5’ at Stuttgart-Stammheim, after the presiding judge had suddenly interrupted proceedings on 27th April and cancelled the next two trial dates. The Ulm 5 are accused of trespass and property damage at the Elbit Systems site in Ulm, south-west Germany. Elbit Systems is the provider of over 80% of arms for the genocide in Gaza. Prosecutor also alleges membership in a criminal organisation.
The five defendants, despite defence counsel protests that fair trial rights were being violated, were once again marched in by law enforcement, in handcuffs, into a glass cage. They were greeted with supportive clapping and cheers from the public gallery. The court sitting, scheduled for 9am-5pm, again began 1.5 hours late. With four breaks (one of almost 3 hours), actual proceedings took place for less than two hours.
Presiding judge Kathrin Lauchstädt finally granted defence counsel the right to speak, having refused this on the first trial day. The lawyers argued their motions must be heard immediately, as they addressed irreversible rights losses. These included seating arrangements that prevent confidential lawyer-client communication; permission for the defence to take a detailed note of proceedings (there are no transcripts for most German trials); inadequate simultaneous translation; permission for defendants to take notes themselves; and freedom of the press. Yet after an extended performance of consultation the judge again summarily rejected the defence’s right to make every single application.
These are not minor procedural matters; rather, the defence argues, they go to defendants’ fundamental constitutional rights. See also quotes from 3 of the 11 defence lawyers below.
Once again, the trial never progressed to opening statements by prosecution, defence and defendants. Only the defendants’ personal details were established. Yet even this basic task exposed the gross inadequacy of the communication arrangements as information needed to be repeated several times, leading to confusion and delays. One of the defendants could even be heard in the public gallery when she spoke with defence counsel via the intercom. As long as fundamental issues repeatedly raised by defendants and defence counsel are not addressed by the court – particularly the inability of defendants to communicate confidentially with their lawyers and the lack of note-takers for the defence – there appears to be little hope proceedings will progress on future trial dates.
Previously, we expressed our fears that the Ulm 5 were facing a show trial. Yesterday, during the hearing, the defence also described proceedings as a ‘show trial’ (Schauprozess). Yet, up to now, with the court determined not to admit any perspectives from the defence, it has been mainly a show of force from the court, and very little trial.
Once again we call for international trial monitoring to ensure the Ulm 5s’ constitutional and human rights are upheld. It is not just the Ulm 5, but also German justice that is on trial at Stammheim.
Families and partners of the Ulm 5 are available for interviews: ulm5family@proton.me
Statements from defence lawyers for the Ulm 5 - 12th May 2026
Nina Onèr, defence counsel for Zo:
The defence renewed its efforts today to bring its most urgent and pressing concerns to the attention of the court; these are, in particular, seating arrangements and the admission of note takers.
The defence cannot concentrate on its primary task without a team of note takers. There is no verbatim record of proceedings at the Regional Court (Landgericht). But the court has so far, and for no objective reason, denied us a note-taking team. A written record is exceptionally important to us, especially with regard to a possible appeal. The exclusion of note takers is not just a demonstration of power, but a substantial restriction on the defence.
Also, the issue of the seating plan, to which we objected on multiple occasions before, during, and after yesterday’s hearing, cannot simply be postponed until an arbitrary time set by the court, after the prosecutor has read the charges. An irreversible loss of rights arises if the defendants cannot follow the trial with their lawyers at all times.
It is our duty as the defence to ensure the agency of the accused, as this court is violating their rights as accused and thus their fundamental constitutional and human rights.
After last week, when the court did not even give us right of audience, today it became bogged down in a cycle of directives, opinions, and orders, simply because it refuses to resolve the most rudimentary organisational matters.
We could have been conducting this trial - alongside our clients - in an appropriate courtroom of the Stuttgart Regional Court for two weeks now. Instead, the trial is further delayed by unnecessary interruptions and disciplinary measures.
The fact that the presiding judge, after all this, even pretended that her interests aligned with those of the defendants and the defence is contemptuous in the extreme.
Mathes Breuer, defence counsel for Leandra:
The court has once again proven that it does not care about the rights of the Ulm 5. The court denied our applications to sit with our clients and thus denied any possibility for confidential communications during the trial. The court has violated the right to fair trial in a way that is irreversible.
Benjamin Düsberg, defence counsel for Daniel:
The State Security Chamber did not shift its position on the second day of the trial and continues to reject basic constitutional standards. As defence lawyers we will not stoop to being party to the sham legitimation of a show trial.
Defence counsel: Dr. Maja Beisenherz, München, Info@beisenherz.eu, 0177 / 70 95 812 Michael Brenner, Nürnberg, michael.brenner@anw-nbg.de, 0911 / 37 66 42 77 Mathes Breuer, München, breuer@kanzlei-abe.de, 0175 / 52 46 963 Anna Magdalena Busl, Bonn, busl@anwaltsbuero-bonn.de, 0176 / 23 23 32 35 Benjamin Düsberg, Berlin, mail@rechtsanwalt-duesberg.de, 0157 / 30 30 8383 Carolin Kaufmann, Berlin, kaufmann@akm-berlin.de, 0172 / 47 21 420 Rosa Mayer-Eschenbach, München, eschenbach@kanzlei-abe.de, 0176 / 65 35 94 43 Christina Mucha, Memmingen, info@kanzlei-mucha.de, 08331 / 69 08 136 Nina Onèr, Berlin, kanzlei@ninaoner.de, 01520 97 33 278 Matthias Schuster, Berlin, mail@anwalt-schuster.de, 0176 / 24 75 8230 Martina Sulzberger, Augsburg, kanzlei@anwaeltin-sulzberger.de; 0821 / 50 87 3850