The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

“There’s nothing in the film that feels far away or not relatable”

Interview with Annemarie Jacir, director of ‘Palestine 36’


25/04/2026

Movie poster for Palestine 36. A man surrounded by fighting stands, adjusting the white cloth around his head and stares straight ahead.

Hi Annemarie. Thank you for making a great film. Can we start with one question. Most histories of Palestine start in 1948 or maybe later. Why was 1936 so important to you?

The uprising of 36 is arguably the longest and largest anti-colonial uprising, and the six month strike was the longest strike to date. It spread to the whole country. I think it marks a very critical moment, because although the revolt was crushed in 1939, it really sets the stage for 1948, which, as you said, is usually when we talk about Palestinian history.

I don’t think it’s possible to talk about 48 without understanding what happens in 1936-39 with this uprising. The political leadership is exiled. There is no longer a leadership in the country. One out of every 10 Palestinian men is in prison or killed. It has a huge effect on the country; that has to be part of the conversation.

The first proposals for partition, starting with the Peel Commission, are all things that I think are really important to know when we talk about Palestine.

One of the interesting things about moving to 1936 is that it shifts the focus away from the Israelis and the Jewish settlers and more to the British. What do you think was the role of Britain leading up to ‘48?

I definitely wanted to talk about that, to explore the role of the British in this. Palestine is often called one of the last colonies. And all the lessons from everywhere else, like India, were put into practice here. The British and the French carved up our entire region according to an agenda that would serve them.

We feel this today very much. It’s still here. I think much of what we’re dealing with today is a result of that, and the fact that many governments are still complicit in it.

Something that’s often missing from the discussion is that the 1948 Nakba was around the same time as the liberation of India, and then the partition of India. It’s also the beginning of anti-colonial struggles in Africa and Asia

There’s a scene in the film where you see the men on the horses come in and if you speak Arabic, you hear that his accent is Syrian. I wanted to flirt with the fact that there was an anti-colonial revolt happening against the French in Lebanon and Syria. There was a connection between what was happening to the Palestinians and the Syrians and the Lebanese.

It’s also often forgotten that anti-colonial struggles are often connected, or that there’s movement between them. That scene is a reference to that. The scene is a lot about unity which was lost. Colonialism divides and separates. When we hear the way he’s talking in this scene about unity—that unity is gone today, unfortunately. That divide-and-conquer strategy worked and it’s still at play.

Could you say something about the role class plays in the film? We see that all Palestinians are affected by the occupation, but they’re not all affected equally, and they don’t respond in the same way.

For sure. Class was important. This revolt in particular was a farmer-led revolt. Then you also have Khalid at the port. The film talks about the working class and what was happening at the port. This film was always about groups of people in different classes, each dealing in their own way.

Kholoud, an upper class journalist supports the revolt, but in a very different way. They are affected differently. The brutality of the army, for example, is something that the villagers are confronted with on a regular basis.

For the British in the cities and diplomatic life, and the kind of life that Kholoud and Amir experienced, there were parties, there were clubs, there was movement, there were good times. They didn’t see the brutality of what was happening in the countryside. And unless you knew about it, you could even pretend it didn’t even exist.

Quite often resistance struggles are portrayed as being just about men with guns. Your film spends a lot of time also talking about the resistance of women. I guess this was a choice on your part.

It’s just the reality, because you have a revolt, but it’s not just men with guns. That’s not what a revolt is. It’s also this woman, Kholoud in the city, a journalist who is involved through writing articles. There’s also a woman in the countryside, the mother of the little girl who never picks up a gun, but she’s bringing food to the fighters.

These are all moments of what revolt is. But maybe not in the typical ways we see revolt. The whole film takes place at this very critical moment. But I’m less interested in the battle scenes or clashes.

I’m more interested in the father and son, this boy walking home with his father and getting stopped by the soldiers and getting searched, and the humiliation that that boy feels at that moment; the question in his mind of why his father doesn’t respond in a stronger way. Why is his father smiling in this moment that he finds so uncomfortable?

These little things are more interesting to me as a film maker than the big men with guns. I like that phrase.

There’s one thing I’d have liked to see more in the film, and that is of the general strike. It’s always there in the background, but it’s something that’s just there. I know you don’t have the time to show everything, but what was the thinking behind this?

There’s a lot I would love to have spent more time with. I agree with you. I think that the general strike was an incredible moment and a very important one. And we do feel the strike, but it’s not delved into as much. There’s just so much to say. There’s so many stories during this period that I focused on other things, I guess.

What do you think are the similarities and the differences between occupation and resistance in Palestine in 1936 and occupation and resistance in 2026?

I live in a place where we are surrounded by checkpoints to go from point A to point B. Our bodies are searched. Our hair is searched. Our fingers are searched. There are curfews. You need a transit pass. You need this. You need that. The borders are closed. Printing presses are shut down.

Everything that the film deals with is still happening right now—administrative detention, a young man being tied to a car and driven out—which the British often did. They would tie somebody to a car to get out of a village, so that they would protect themselves with a human shield.

The day we shot that scene, the same thing happened in Nablus. A Palestinian man was tied up to an Israeli military vehicle, and it happened to be caught on a news camera, so people saw it. But this happens all the time. The army comes crashing in and out of villages and towns.

There’s nothing in the film that feels far away or not relatable. There’s the collective punishment, the wall. I could go on and on. Everybody talks about Palestine today and the wall. But the concept of the wall came from the British. Liam Cunningham’s character, Charles Tegart, made the first proposal to build a wall. So, past and present are absolutely blurred.

The film ends with defeat, but it also ends with hope. We hear people shouting “Down with colonialism” and “Revolution,” I guess we should hope that defeat 90 years ago doesn’t mean that Palestinians will lose again

I hope so, and it’s why for me that the last image of the film is this little girl with her hair down, barefoot and running. Where she’s running to, I know for myself, but it doesn’t really matter. She’s like a light to me. Afra was always this light in the film, and she represents perseverance. No matter what, you just continue and you keep going.

Do you have Afra’s hope?

I do. I try to work on that. Without it, we don’t have anything else. I believe hope is important, because otherwise, we’re in darkness.

Have you got plans for what you do next?

I’ve got a couple of projects I’m thinking about. But one thing is recovering from this one and taking care of myself a little bit. Making this film was extremely difficult and became infinitely more difficult. It took years more to make it, stopping and starting production. It took a toll mentally, emotionally, and politically. You look out the window, and you know what’s happening here is not good.

So, I’m trying to sort of take care of myself. I’m also thinking about a few projects. I don’t want to wait 10 years to make the next one, though. I can’t do that.

How important was it that you held out and filmed in Palestine, rather in the neighbouring states?

For me, it was very important. Some things we could not shoot in Palestine, and we had to shoot in Jordan. But then we came back and finished the film in Palestine. It’s very important to me that Jerusalem was Jerusalem, and not another country that looks like Jerusalem.

This is one thing I kept telling the crew. We are the refugees of the world. 75% of Palestinians are refugees. I don’t want this to be a refugee film. It’s really important that we push to do what we can. Maybe next year we won’t be able to do it. But right now, we have to fight for keeping our feet on the ground.

We live here, we have to hire locally. We have to work together. We’re talking about an independent film industry. You have to live and work and make things in the places that you’re talking about. I think it’s important.

If someone sees the film and is inspired, what do you want them to do?

Talk about it. We barely made this film. It was on, off, on. We never knew if we would be able to finish it. Everybody just went crazy to do it and to put it out there.

Now it is out there. So, if somebody watches it, this conversation—this connection—is important. It’s important that there’s an audience after people put everything in order to make this film. And the reason is because we want to connect. We have to connect with each other in this world.

“Getting them acquitted is not just about winning in court, but about what this direct action was aimed at”

Interview with Nina Onèr, lawyer for Zo from the Ulm 5


24/04/2026

Hi Nina. Thanks for talking to us. Could you start by introducing yourself? Who are you and what is your relationship to the Ulm 5?

Hi, my name is Nina Onèr, and I’m a criminal defense lawyer here in Berlin. I specialize in political cases, and I’m defending Zo, one of the Ulm 5 in the case before the Landgericht Stuttgart.

I spoke to Mimi, Daniel’s mother, a couple of weeks ago, and she said that it’s very difficult getting information about how they are. Are you able to say something about what morale is like?

Of course, I can mostly speak about my client. It’s very obvious that the tension is rising now with the court date approaching, but generally they remain steadfast in spirit, and glad that it’s finally about to start. It’s been such a long time, and they’re hopeful that not only the court, but – more importantly – history and public opinion will acquit them for this direct action against an arms manufacturer

What are the conditions like in pre-holding prison?

It differs amongst the five, depending on the detention facility. Every jail has its own discretion on what it thinks are appropriate measures in order to sustain what they deem “public safety and order” within the facility. Some are being held in solitary. Others are in joint cells – although that is also not necessarily a pleasant experience at all times. Some of them work, which gives you a lot more time outside of your cell, and allows you to shower daily, which is not something that others have the privilege of doing.

The restrictive measures that they face, because of what they’re accused of, makes them a lot more isolated. Everything is observed by the state police. I’m extremely worried that this isolation over such a prolonged period of time is going to have long-lasting psychological effects.

It’s outrageous that in pre-trial detention, the conditions they’re held under are a lot stricter than in jail, after an actual conviction, although here the presumption of innocence should be in effect. In prison there are so-called rehabilitation measures, therapeutic options and group activities.  

But the measures in pre-trial detention are a lot stricter, although they haven’t been proven guilty. That’s something that a lot of human rights organizations have been criticizing all over the world. However, Germany sticks to doing that.

The Ulm 5 have been denied bail. Is this usual?

Well, let’s say it’s not completely unusual – the court has upheld the pre-trial detention up to now on the grounds that there was a risk of absconding – so fleeing and not attending the trial, which I think is unreasonable in this case. 

In addition to the “actual” charges of trespass and damage of property, the prosecution then came up with the outrages charge under Section 129 of the German Criminal Code (StGB), which I am sure we will still go into – which massively increases the expected sentence. This allowed them to further strengthen their argument regarding the risk of absconding, saying the expected sentence means the risk of absconding cannot be ruled out even if bail was granted – not least because no one knows where it comes from, so the argument. 

This perpetuates the absurd image of highly criminal, professional structures that the prosecuting authorities are trying to paint regarding the 5. 

Whatever the intention, the effect is that the Five are going to spend nearly a year in prison before they’ve been convicted of anything.

In Germany, bail is just one of the many measures that can replace pre-trial detention. These are five young people who’ve never been convicted of anything prior to this, who filmed themselves during the action, were not masked, and then waited for police to arrive and let themselves be arrested – peacefully and without resisting. 

I don’t think there were probable grounds for pre-trial detention in the first place, so I don’t think bail should have been necessary.

But prosecution has made such a point of demonizing the Five – it started back at the arrest when they were being transported from the court in Ulm to the respective jails. Masked policemen were surrounding the building as if we were facing a group of very dangerous criminals. And now they are doing everything in their power to uphold this narrative. 

But they haven’t committed any violent attacks at all.

Exactly.

The Ulm 5 targeted an Elbit factory. Could you quickly say something about the role of Elbit?

That specific plant in Ulm is Elbit Systems Germany, which is a direct daughter of Elbit Systems, an Israeli Arms Company supplying the vast majority of arms used in the war in Gaza – mostly drones of all different types and technology for them. That’s why this direct action was aimed at them. 

You mentioned Section 129, which was in the news again a week or 2 ago when it was used to justify the raids of 15 community centres in Berlin. What is Section 129, and how is it being used?

The tricky thing about Section 129 is that it has such a broad definition – such a wide range of acts may fall within the scope of the acts required by the definition of the offence which  makes it so easy for prosecution to charge people under this Section. Even more so if you look beyond “membership of a criminal organisation ” towards what the alternative element of the offence “aiding a criminal organization” can entail. 

Basically, prosecution has and is using this specific section specifically in order to suppress and punish unpopular political opinion.

It’s broadly used in political cases, and is aimed at specific political opinions, views, or actions that are deemed undesirable in the current political climate. It’s also an extremely useful tool, because in criminal proceedings, it allows an extremely wide range of observational measures.This makes it possible to implement extremely far-reaching and intrusive surveillance measures,like telecommunications surveillance and that’s probably how those raids were made possible. 

The charge against the Ulm 5 is that they were members of an illegal group. What does that even mean?

Section 129 is about membership of a kriminelle Vereinigung, in English: a criminal organisation. An organisation in this sense is a long-term, organised group of more than two people, formed to pursue an overarching common interest and which pursues this interest by committing criminal offences of some gravity. 

The Ulm 5 are charged with membership but as mentioned before, there is an alternative – the supporting of a criminal organisation. This could be anything from distributing flyers to collecting donations. 

So once a certain “group” has been classified as a criminal organisation it creates so much uncertainty as to how they can still be supported, even by friends and family, because It has such wide reaching effects – in effect this scares away support, making it extremely hard for these people to be supported by outside groups without the supporters risking persecution themselves.

Is there a parallel here with the criminalization of Palestine Action in Britain?

The criminalisation of PA UK and this classification of the Ulm 5 as a criminal organization politically follows the exact same line of reasoning in my opinion, and the prosecution has adopted the UK’s assessment without question; they must now, of course, reconsider this in light of the ruling by the High Court, revoking PA UK’s classification, but I’m not even sure they are aware of that. 

At the press conference a couple of weeks ago, you said it was significant that the trials are being held in Stammheim. Can you expand a bit on this?

I think this fits in very well within the narrative that prosecution is trying to paint from the very beginning. As I said, they’re trying to demonize those five. I expected from pretty early on that we will end up in this high security courthouse. 

There was no court house there before. The location is JVA Stammheim – a prison and the initial court house was built in the Seventies – specifically for one of the earliest trials in connection with the Red Army Fraction. 

It’s an outer branch of the Oberlandgericht Stuttgart –  the higher Regional Court of Stuttgart and usually only so-called terrorism trials are held there. 

The extreme security measures will complicate everything: access from the public, support from friends and family, media coverage and  – most gravely – defence. We are meant to speak to our clients, who are supposed to be seated behind a two meter high bulletproof safety glass, via radio using a microphone or through a small slit in said security glass. All the while, court officers stand guard nearby. 

The interested public are  going to be searched, have their IDs copied, and will not be allowed to bring food, drink or even pens in. The number of places is limited. 

Do you think there’s a deliberate attempt to associate the Ulm five with the Baader- Meinhof group?

Well, maybe not the Baader-Meinhof group specifically, but all this is definitely trying to put them in a terrorist corner.

As a lawyer inside the court, what support do you need from people outside?

Showing up is important. I think that the best anyone can do is just be there, to show that they are not alone, that there are plenty of good people who support them. It’s such a long trial, the individual hearing dates have been so spread out which is just another way of making support really hard. I would urge anyone who wants to support to organize accordingly so that there aren’t 100 people wanting to join on the first day – who then also won’t be able to find a space and instead make sure there’s always some support throughout the planned three months period.

The court knows that these five people have all been living in Berlin, and that family and friends will want to come from Berlin and beyond to attend. 

Also, four of the five families aren’t even in Germany, so they’ve got even further to travel

Yes

Is there anything that people who can’t attend the court case can do?

Media coverage is extremely important. This specific case has been covered very little, and only by a small and specific number of media houses in Germany. This is unfortunate and does not do justice to the background. In my opinion it would be appropriate for major news agencies to take up this story, given the motives and background involved. 

Sending letters has also been appreciated dearly, because this whole process is aimed at isolating them. It’s been over seven months and we cannot underestimate the power of emotional support.

I notice that while everybody in Britain knows of Palestine Action, even many German activists don’t know about the Ulm 5. Why is this and how can we turn this round?

What we’ve seen ever since October 2023 is that Germany is trying to silence any criticism of the Israeli government in the name of the so called Staatsräson, pleading complete loyalty to Israel no matter what, and trying to put everyone and everything who legitimately criticizes the state of Israel and this illegal war in the antisemitic corner.

This has had such a huge effect on the public that a lot of people have just become completely insecure if and how any legitimate criticism of Israel can be voiced. After two and a half years of witnessing a genocide, we have the obligation, especially as Germans, to universal human rights and to never again look away when they are violated, no matter by whom.

Even the Ulm 5 are being accused of antisemitism

Correct. The prosecution somehow has twisted the action to fit into its way of arguing why this action is antisemitic. I do not want to give away our defence strategy prematurely, but the defence will go to show why this is completely unfounded – and just another way of avoiding looking at the actual motives – during the trial hearing. 

How is the defense being financed?

We are court ordered lawyers. The state is advancing the money, but if convicted, the Ulm 5 will have to pay. If acquitted, then the state will end up paying.

How likely do you think that the Ulm 5 will win?

This might come as a surprise to you, but I’m actually convinced that we have a very good shot at proving that this action was justified under either section 32 or 34 of the German Criminal Code. Instead of Notwehr (self-defence), this is called Nothilfe, which is defense of someone else.

By showing that there is an ongoing present attack against the people of Palestine, and that no other measures were sufficient to stop Germany from exporting arms despite wide knowledge that this is against international law, the action was justified.

Once damage of property and entering are justified, this whole accusation of criminal organization just falls apart, because according to the definition a criminal organization is an organization whose purpose it is to commit criminal offences of some gravity – no criminal offences, no criminal organization. So, I’m hopeful.

Some people have been worried because Germany tends not to have jury trials. Does this mean that it’s weighted on the side of the prosecution?

At the end of the day, it’s the court who makes the decision, not the prosecution. And we do actually have two lay judges here, alongside the three other judges. This has its advantages and disadvantages. 

Usually prosecution and the court outnumbers the defence. In this specific case we are also many. We are five defendants with at least two defence lawyers each, so we are also strong in numbers.

But the real power imbalance usually doesn’t lie in the number of people in court, but in the resources that prosecution has. Prosecution can, at a whim, send out 50 policemen to investigate. Unlike us, they can call on 100 experts to give opinions without having to worry about how to finance it. But we’re not sparing any resources in our power in order to get across our point.

One of our important resources is public opinion. What can people do to support you?

Given the broad scope of 129 I don’t want to encourage people too much. Everyone needs to look out for themselves. But in terms of support for the legal aspects of the trial itself, we are working on everything we can. We’re in a good position. And if there’s still something we might need, we will ask specifically,

Is there anything we haven’t covered yet that you’d like to say

We talked about how there hasn’t been much coverage of the Ulm Five. Many of us wonder what has become of the anti-war movement from our parents’ generation. We had expected a much wider public to rally behind this kind of action. 

This was a direct action aimed at a weapons manufacturer – with the resurgence of the idea of mandatory military conscription and remilitarisation here in Germany, perhaps this presents an opportunity for the anti-war movement to get back on its feet, return to its core values, show up and show support.

As I said, getting the Five acquitted is not just about winning in court, but about winning the public opinion on what this direct action was aimed at.

Maybe there’s some hope in the school strikes.

Yeah, exactly

What can I do to support the Ulm 5?

The trial starts next Monday. Here’s what you can do to help

The Ulm 5

Five activists with various nationalities have spent the last 7 months in different prisons around South Germany. Their crime? Taking non-violent direct action against Elbit Systems. Elbit Systems is Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer (famous for their killer drones), and is deeply complicit in the Gaza genocide. 

Crow, Daniel, Leandra, Vi, and Zo are facing harsh pre-trial conditions, ranging from long hours spent in isolation to being deprived of ways to keep themselves entertained and even being stripped of their clothing for an unnecessary amount of time.

Their court hearings are set to begin on Monday, 27th April. 16 hearings have been planned over 3 months. Although all that they did was damage property, the German state is collectively charging the defendants with being part of a “criminal organisation.” This carries a possible jail sentence of 5 years for each of them.

In a crucial time of escalating Zionist and imperialist aggression, it is imperative to stand by activists who have taken courageous action while the state has refused to give up its support for Israel, and corporations are not held accountable for their material support. This article will detail some ways in which you can support them.

Go to the court cases

The Ulm 5 have been held for 8 months in de facto solitary confinement. The best way of showing how much we care about them is by showing up to their court hearings. We encourage everyone to self-organize and visit one or more of their trials. Bring your friends and comrades! For the first court hearing on the 27th of April, Berliners can make use of collectively organized transport and accommodation.

The trials will be held in the Stammheim Court in Stuttgart, Asperger Straße 47. Court hearings are planned for 27th April, 4th, 6th, 11th 20th 22nd, and 29th May, 15th, 19th and 29th June, and 1st, 3rd, 22nd, 24th, 27th, and 29th July. All court hearings will start at 9am. It is possible that some hearings will be canceled or rescheduled on short notice, so please stay informed here.

Filling the court with supporters helps strengthen the morale of the 5 and their lawyers, but please be aware that there is a limited number of seats available inside the court. 68 places are available in the court, of which 30 have been reserved for the press, leaving only 38 places free for family and supporters. 

Even if you cannot enter the court, the Five would like there to be as large a presence as possible. A rally will be held in front of the court from 8am onwards. Sometimes, judges are influenced positively by hearing the people outside. If the defendants are to enter the court before 8am, a rally may be organised earlier to greet them.

Get your solibus tickets at L5 Spati (Lenaustr. 5 daily 12-24 o’ clock) or by emailing common_journey_court_watch@systemli.org. The solibus will depart on Sunday April 26th at 10am from Südkreuz. That same bus will bring us to the court early in the morning on the 27th and back to Berlin after the court hearing ends.

Accommodation is arranged in Karlsruhe – just bring your sleeping mat and bag. The trial could last until 4 or 5pm. After that, people may stay for 30-60 minutes to wait for the defendants to leave the court. 

If you want to be in court, make sure you bring an ID or passport. It is likely that you will have to leave mobile phones, laptops, and other personal belongings in security lockers outside the court. Do not bring any items which could be interpreted as weapons (this includes metal water bottles), or any sensitive documents which could be confiscated by security.

Become a Trial Observer

German court cases are not recorded, and no transcript is made. This is why Trial Observers write down everything that is said in court and how it is said. Watch out for sarcasm and demeaning language. Written reports can help defence lawyers. They are particularly useful in the case of the defendants being convicted, as evidence based on the reports can be used to appeal the sentence. 

Try and write down everything you hear and see. If you get tired, note the time from which you are unable to pay full attention.

After the day is over, trial observers compare notes to produce a written report. You will only be allowed to take handwritten notes – transfer these to a computer as soon as you can. Try to distinguish between facts and subjective impressions. It is important that you do not publish your notes until checking with others, as this could jeopardize the case.

It is quite possible that the judge and security will try to deny entry to the court to some of us, so if you intend to take notes, do not wear clothes with slogans which may get you excluded. At present, it also appears possible that court observers might not be permitted to bring any writing materials into the court.

If you are interested in becoming a trial observer, there will be people on the buses to Stuttgart who you can talk to. Alternatively, send a message to us at team@theleftberlin.com, and we will help you make contact.

Support funding campaigns for parents to travel

Four of the Ulm 5 are not from Germany, which means that their families face exorbitant costs if they are to attend the trial. On top of this, the court cases have been staggered, so that 16 days in court will take place over 3 months. Attending each court case requires 16 potential journeys to their countries and back.

To help the families cover these costs, a number of crowdfunding campaigns have been set up. Please give generously:

Send letters to the prisoners

Many of the prisoners are being held in prison 23 hours a day. Letter writing is therefore a huge boost to their morale and helps keep them connected with the outside world and the campaign that supports them. At present, it takes 2 to 4 weeks for letters to arrive. Some letters have taken 5 months, and 2 that arrived only recently were sent in October.

When writing letters to prisoners, there are a few important things to consider.

  • Write a date on the letter so the prisoner will know when you sent it. 
  • Take a photo of the letter before you send it for your own records. 
  • Include a return address on the letter itself.
  • If you include anything in the envelope, write that you did so that the prisoner will know if any items were confiscated.
  • Letters with only a picture or drawing are not allowed, but you can send pictures as long as the envelope also contains a written letter.
  • It is forbidden for you to write about the Ulm 5’s action, the case, or related matters.

Please note that letters will be surveilled, and their contents might be used against the prisoners or even yourself. Do not write about the actions that the prisoner is detained for, the prisoner’s relation to the action, or how you feel about them, as this could put both them and you at risk. 

You can send an online letter to any or all of the prisoners here.

You can also write to Leandra in English or Spanish at the following address:
Leandra Daniela Rollo Valenzuela
JVA Memmingen
Gaswerkstr. 23
87700 Memmingen
Germany 

You can write to Vi at:
Vivien Sonja Kovarbasic
701 561/2025
JVA Schwäbisch Gmünd
Herlikofer Str. 19
73527 Schwäbisch Gmünd 
NOTE: Vi is only allowed to receive letters which are written in German.

You can write to Daniel at:
Daniel Tatlow-Devally
JVA Ulm
Frauengraben 4
89072 Ulm

Zo and Crow’s addresses are not public, but you can send them an online letter (see link above). You can also send letters to any prisoner (including Zo and Crow) via this post box:
C/O <prisoner name>
Postfach 91 01 07
12413 Berlin
Germany

You can find more tips about sending letters here.

Let people know

One of the biggest problems facing the Ulm 5 is that, despite the severity of their potential sentences, very few people know about their case. In contrast, say, to Palestine Action in the UK, where thousands of pensioners have let themselves be arrested in solidarity, very few people in Germany, including many activists, know about the Ulm 5. This makes it easier for the German state to isolate them and prevent a mass campaign from developing.

One of the simplest ways of showing solidarity is to ensure that as many people as possible know who the Ulm 5 are, what they did, and what they are being threatened with. We have the potential to build a campaign which is both broad and international.

Here are a few ways you could do this.

Inform yourself

The German state will benefit if the public at large is not paying attention to the court hearings. Public scrutiny matters. It is becoming increasingly clear that the state aims to threaten, repress and ultimately end anti-Zionist activism. The Ulm 5 could easily become a precedent for future repression. 

What further exacerbates their situation is that mainstream German media are not reporting about the Ulm 5. This is a problem for democracy. Staying informed and informing people you know about what happens to the Ulm 5 during their court hearings is a good place to start.

People in solidarity with the Ulm 5 have created this website and Instagram page to keep people informed and rally support. The Left Berlin website will also continue to keep the spotlight on the Ulm 5 during their trials.

Tell your friends and workmates

We can fight state oppression, media silence and the escalating criminalization of Palestine solidarity by building a shared consciousness with people we spend time with in our daily life. If we do not converse about the unfolding events, we miss the opportunity to see the current political climate for what it is. Let’s build educated networks that can meaningfully resist. 

No one wants to or should be made to live in a world where “might is right”, nor should we be forced to remain sidelined when the bombs drop on innocent people in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran. Take this opportunity to stand by the people who risked so much to put a cog in the wheel of our genocidal economy, a risk not many are willing to take. Risk is only ever reduced by carrying it collectively. We can learn from British society’s remarkable solidarity with imprisoned Palestine Action activists.

Contact the media

If you are a journalist, write about what is happening to the Ulm 5. If you are not a journalist, you can still use social media to share stories and write your own opinions. Remember that this is not just a German story. The more coverage we get in the international media, the better.

Leaflets and petitions

We encourage every activist group or individuals to print out and distribute flyers and posters to promote the cause of the Ulm 5. 

  • The Gaza Komitee has weekly information stalls at various locations in Berlin where flyers about the Ulm 5 are distributed. Their stories will keep you posted on the time, location and whereabouts.
  • Download a leaflet about the Ulm 5 here available in English or Arabic and German.
  • Download a poster of the Ulm 5 here – print and hang in spaces of solidarity.

Organise local actions

There will be a rally Free the Ulm 5 at Oranienplatz on Thursday, April 23rd at 6.30pm. As the trial will last several months, there will be further opportunities for actions in Berlin – for example at Universities, or at embassies (between them, the Ulm 5 have nationalities of Irish, British, German, and Spanish-Argentinian). If you want to organise something, please let us know and The Left Berlin will help to publicise. 

Send a video message in your language

One way of keeping the story in the public eye, and to build international attention, is to share videos in social media. Make your own short message explaining what is happening to the Ulm 5 and why you support them. If you release the video on Instagram, tag the Ulm 5 and Left Berlin accounts and we will help share it.

Further Information

Court sentences student to over 2.5 years in prison without probation

Repression in Berlin – report #8

On Monday, April 13th, the Berlin Regional Court ruled on the attack on Lahav Shapia – a student known for his staunch support of Israel and campaigns against pro-Palestinian activists. No antisemitic motive could be established in the assault Shapira had suffered by a fellow student on the campus of the Free University. This ruling overruled an earlier decision by the local court.

Notwithstanding this decision, the Regional Court again sentenced A. to a prison term for aggravated assault. The sentence of two years and six months is more lenient than the original sentence of three years, but it rejected the accused’ lawyers appeal for probation.

In February 2024, a few months into Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, Shapira and A. happened to meet in a bar in Berlin-Mitte. Both were studying to become teachers at the Freie Universität (FU) Berlin. The initial conflict between the students became physical and A., with a background in martial arts, happened to injure Shapira. In court A. state that he was not seeking to cause severe or even lasting damage.

The attack had been preceded by a dispute at FU Berlin. Shapira had removed posters against the Israeli genocide at the FU, which had been hung as part of a pro-Palestinian occupation of a lecture hall. The two men did not know each other personally, but were active in the same chat groups, where students had debated the genocide and anti-Palestinian climate at the university. In these groups, Shapira and others advocated a pro-Israeli stance.

At the court in April, the question of the actual physical attack was never put up for debate. A. confessed early on that he had beaten Shapira. According to the public prosecutor, the “detective work” in the first trial tried to prove a specifically antisemitic motive for A. While the local court last year had spoken of an “antisemitic outburst of violence,” the appeal chamber of the Regional Court now saw things differently.

According to the presiding judge, there was no evidence that the defendant had an antisemitic attitude. Since the exact content of the act could not be reliably reconstructed, the court did not consider the motive proven beyond doubt. A., who lost his place at the FU and suffered from month of racist campaigning against him, had always denied an antisemitic motivation.

His defense lawyer emphasized, for example, that the exchange between the two men in the chats had been respectful for a long time, even though they argued over Israel-critical positions. A. had merely argued that it was wrong of Shapira to tear down the posters. Even in the first instance, no antisemitic statements by A. had been found during the taking of evidence.

The Berlin Regional Court’s decision to sentence A. to two and a half years in prison for aggravated assault, despite explicitly rejecting any antisemitic motive, exposes a deeply troubling logic.

The court admits that there is no evidence of antisemitic intent, no hate-driven ideology, no proven link between the defendant’s political views and the attack. Yet he is sent to prison. Meanwhile, Lahav Shapira — a person who actively removes pro-Palestinian posters, participates in creating a hostile online environment, and has now taken legal action to suppress campus solidarity with Palestine — is framed as a pure victim. His own political stance in support of a state that commits a life-streamed genocide is rendered invisible.

This case is not an outlier. It is a textbook example of how Germany’s judiciary systematically criminalises Palestinians and their supporters, in particular People of Colour, while sanitizing those who defend and advocate the inconceivable violence of the Israeli state.

25 April 1974: Carnation Revolution

This week in working class history

April 1974 marks the end of Portugal’s 42-year fascist dictatorship. On that day, after months of clandestine organising since September 1973, the Armed Forces Movement (Movimento das Forças Armadas, MFA) launched a military coup that overthrew the Estado Novo (“New State”) regime. 

Many of the military involved had grown disillusioned with the colonial wars in Guinea-Bissau, Angola and Mozambique, which they saw as unjust and unwinnable. In previous years, the country’s isolated position grew as the regime’s military spending rose in response to the independence movements in the “ultramarine territories”. Internally, many people were either resisting despite the repression, or fleeing the country to France and the United States. 

On 25 April, within hours, the MFA seized control of the national radio broadcaster and of key military centres across the country, forcing Prime Minister Marcelo Caetano (successor to António de Oliveira Salazar) to surrender. Despite the MFA’s warnings to stay home, the people took to the streets in support of the coup, and, in a whimsical act, flowers were distributed amongst the soldiers’ gun barrels – baptising it as the Carnation Revolution. 

The regime’s political police, PIDE, infamous for imprisonment, torture, and killings of dissidents, was dismantled shortly after. However, the revolution was not a day; but rather a process that lasted 19 months: 25 April kickstarted PREC – Ongoing Revolutionary Process, a period of intense political transformation, marked by popular mobilisation through strikes and demonstrations, the occupation and takeover of workplaces by the workers for weeks or sometimes months, especially in the southern and central parts of Portugal; initiatives for popular education, and the nationalisation of banking and other sectors. After months of political tension between the liberal and leftist-communist forces, the revolutionary wave came to an end in November 1975, with a right-wing, liberal, US-backed counter-coup. 

25 April is both a history of resistance and of working class consciousness; As Sérgio Godinho sang in 1974 – and the Portuguese people, to this day: “There is only true freedom when there is peace, bread, housing, health, education; there is only true freedom when what the people produce belongs to the people”. Read more here.