The Hamburg regional court has had audio recordings of a journalist from the weekly newspaper “Zeit” seized. The criminal chamber expects this to provide new insights into the statements of important witnesses. The publisher, however, speaks of a disproportionate attack on press freedom and has lodged a complaint. The trial against Christina Block and six co-defendants continues on Tuesday.
In the criminal trial against Hamburg entrepreneur Christina Block - and in the middle of the Hamburg Press Freedom Week that has just started - the conflict is intensifying over the question of how far a court can intervene in journalistic material when searching for evidence. The Large Criminal Chamber of the Hamburg Regional Court, which is responsible for the proceedings, has secured audio recordings that are used as the basis for conversations for the podcast “ZEIT Crime: House of Block”. To this end, she ordered the apartment of a “Zeit” journalist to be searched on Monday. The search was not carried out because the journalist voluntarily handed over the requested items and thereby made use of the authority granted to her to prevent them.
The public prosecutor's office and the State Criminal Police Office had previously visited the Hamburg offices of "Zeit". According to the court and publisher, a search warrant was also available for this. In addition to the interview recordings, the investigators demanded alleged contract documents for the podcast's conversation partners. However, the publisher explained that there was no such contract. After an employee announced that the recordings were with the journalist, there was no search in the editorial offices.
According to its own statements, the court considers the material to have a possible significance for further taking of evidence. According to information in the podcast, the conversations with members of the affected family, including children, were held in a so-called safe house in Denmark around two weeks after the events on New Year's Eve 2023/24. According to the criminal chamber, circumstances may have been discussed that have not yet been discussed in the files or in the main hearing. In addition, the original recordings could be used to check the credibility of later witness statements.
The chamber relies on its duty to extend the taking of evidence to all facts and evidence that are significant for the decision. In their opinion, a ban on confiscation does not apply here. The journalistic right to refuse to testify can be restricted according to legal provisions if a statement is intended to help solve a crime. The court refers, among other things, to the accusation made in the proceedings of severe mistreatment of those under protection. In his opinion, there is no risk of undercover informants being exposed because the identities of the interviewees have already been revealed.
Zeit-Verlag assesses the approach fundamentally differently. The recordings were released, but handed over sealed. At the same time, the publisher objected to the confiscation so that the material would not be evaluated before the legal review was completed. The threatened search and the securing of the interviews were disproportionate and violated freedom of the press. According to its own information, “Zeit” has filed a complaint. The editors-in-chief Giovanni di Lorenzo and Jochen Wegner particularly referred to the protection of sources as a prerequisite for independent journalistic work.
This means that the block process, which has been underway since July 2025, has an additional media law dimension shortly before its next continuation. Christina Block and six other defendants must answer before the Hamburg district court in connection with the forcible repatriation of two children from Denmark on New Year's Eve 2023/24. Christina Block denies having commissioned the campaign. For months, the extensive collection of evidence has revolved around the origins, planning and execution of the repatriation campaign as well as the question of which participants knew about it and at what point in time. The presumption of innocence applies to all defendants.
When the main hearing continues on Tuesday, October 13th, the focus will not only be on the actual accusation. It is also unclear whether and when the sealed recordings may be evaluated and what consequences the publisher's complaint will have. The block process, which was already exceptionally well supported by the public, has therefore also become a fundamental conflict over the limits of state access to editorial material.
