Press release from families & friends of the Ulm5 – 19th May 2026, Stuttgart-Stammheim
Judge extends ‘Ulm5’ trial duration to 8½ months, pre-trial detention to 16 months
Families call on German court to release the five immediately, call on Irish, Spanish, UK governments to monitor show trial of their citizens
It's not just the activists – German justice itself is on trial
Next hearings: 20th, 22nd, 29th May – 9:00 at Asperger Str. 47, 70439 Stuttgart
Yesterday, the Stuttgart Regional Court in a surprise development nearly tripled the length of the Ulm5 trial, issuing a further 28 dates beyond the 16 originally announced hearings, stretching the ordeal across eight and a half months to January 2027.
A trial of over eight months is wildly disproportionate as many facts are uncontested: the defendants filmed themselves and waited to be arrested. Indeed, although police and prosecutor had precious little investigating to do, the prosecutor declined to do his basic job, which is to examine exonerating as well as incriminating evidence. Despite defence requests he refused to investigate Elbit Systems Deutschland's role in the genocide in Gaza. And yet the court did not actually start the trial until four months after the investigation ended.
German and international press have been scathing about the farcical trial. Now the court intends to make a further laughing stock of itself and of Germany with a cruel threat of endless proceedings.
German ‘justice’ actively breaches human rights – and is also inefficient beyond belief
In Germany, pre-trial detention is rare, and the standard limit is six months. Should the Presiding Judge Kathrin Lauchstädt extend the trial to January 2027, the five friends will have been in pre-trial detention – some in 23-hour solitary confinement – for 18 months. “The court is shattering the myth of German efficiency,” says Josi, partner of co-defendant Vi Kovarbasic. “If the judge truly needs this much time, then she also needs to follow the Basic Law of Germany – its constitution. If authorities deprive suspects of their liberties, they must conduct proceedings as quickly as possible. Vi and their friends must be released from prison immediately, until a verdict is reached. Vi has lost ten kilograms because of poor nutrition, lack of exercise, and stress from systematic repression. The prison conditions are beyond preemptive punishment – they amount to torture.”
In nearly a month of proceedings, the court has only sat twice, with active hearing time only about three hours combined. Repeatedly, security guards marched Vi, Zo, Leandra, Crow, and Daniel in and out, in handcuffs, into a bulletproof glass cage, violating the presumption of innocence, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) fair trial rights, and European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings.
Kathrin Lauchstädt did not permit defence counsel to speak on the first trial day and stated all their efforts to improve their clients’ trial conditions would vanish from the record. On the second day she summarily rejected every single defence application to lodge motions on trial conditions.
These are not minor procedural matters. They violate defendants’ fundamental constitutional rights.
The Ulm5 are not accused of violence to any persons and none has previous convictions. They are charged with trespass and property damage at the German production site of Elbit Systems in Ulm. Elbit Systems provides 86% of arms for the Israeli military. The prosecutor has added the additional charge of membership in a criminal organisation, which the defence refutes. While the penalty for property damage is a maximum of two years in prison, this add-on under Section 129 means the Ulm5 each face up to five years.
Defence lawyers have issued motions for recusal of all five judges, objecting to the irretrievable rights losses in presenting defendants as if they were guilty and dangerous. Loved ones and most attendees consider this a show trial as evidenced by the security theatre involving the scenography of a bulletproof chamber and handcuffs as props. A freedom of information request revealed the judge never sought to use an available standard courtroom belonging to her own Regional Court (Landgericht). Instead she chose to stage proceedings in a high-security room belonging to the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) – without releasing any security assessment, violating ECtHR rulings.
Defence lawyers also object to the grossly prejudicial media statements the court made about the five; the seating arrangement that does not guarantee confidential lawyer-client communication; the court's refusal to permit a defence notetaker (German courts generally do not record full transcripts; the version of record is determined by the judge); defendants being unable to take notes or fully follow proceedings; inadequate simultaneous translation; and obstruction of the defence’s free communication with the press as the court repeatedly removed defence press packs from attending journalists. Underlying the trial's lack of progress is the gross violation of fair trial rights ordered by the presiding judge. As she refuses to address the fundamental issues that defendants and defence counsel raise – particularly with defendants unable to communicate confidentially with lawyers and the lack of defence note-takers – there is little hope of progress.
“In March, we expressed our fears that the Ulm5 would face a show trial. During the hearing on 11th May, a defence lawyer also described proceedings as such – a Schauprozess,” says Mimi Tatlow-Golden, mother of co-defendant Daniel. “Instead of rectifying rights breaches, we now see the court reaching for yet another power play, attempting to intimidate the defence, defendants, and families by threatening to run this trial across more than eight months. It’s time the governments of these Irish, Spanish, and UK citizens woke up to these egregious violations against their citizens in an EU country. Once again we call for international trial monitoring to ensure the Ulm5's constitutional and human rights are upheld.”
The Ulm5 deserve a fair and speedy trial, and the court must allow their release on bail without further delay. In other words, the German state must follow its own laws, while Ireland, Spain, and UK must step in to assure that their citizens' fundamental rights are respected.
Families and partners are available for interviews: ulm5family@proton.me