In the dispute over a ban on demonstrations at the G-20 summit in 2017, Attac and the GFF are taking the matter to the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig.
AI-generated summary
At the G-20 summit in Hamburg on July 7th and 8th, 2017, the city issued a nationwide ban on demonstrations, which was legally challenged by plaintiffs.
The globalization-critical organization Attac and the Society for Freedom Rights (GFF) are entering the next round in the legal dispute over a ban on protests at the G-20 summit in Hamburg nine years ago.
The Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig confirmed receipt of the grounds for appeal from plaintiff Hanni Gramann from the Federal Council of Attac Germany. However, there is no trial date yet, the court said.
Gramann and Attac registered two protest rallies in downtown Hamburg in June 2017, even though the city had already issued a ban on demonstrations in the urban area for the two summit days from July 7th to 8th, 2017. The city banned the gatherings.
The Hamburg Administrative Court declared the ban illegal in February 2022 as far as Gramann's rally was concerned. At that time, she wanted to draw attention to the connection between free trade and the causes of flight with a symbolic image campaign and speeches under the motto “Free Trade Powers Flight”.
“Our picture campaign posed no danger whatsoever,” said Gramann. It cannot be the case that state organs simply have to identify a confusing overall situation in order to be able to suspend basic rights across the board and set up non-democratic assembly ban zones.
But the Hanseatic city's higher administrative court thwarted the plaintiffs' plans in August and declared the ban on protest demonstrations to be legal. According to the judges, public safety would most likely have been jeopardized if the meetings were held through targeted or de facto blockages of transport and travel routes.
The Society for Civil Rights sees it differently. “The assembly authority took the sledgehammer because of a suspected confusing situation,” said lawyer and GFF procedure coordinator Joschka Selinger. In doing so, the authority misunderstood the importance of freedom of assembly as a means of social debate. "Protest must be able to take place near the event in question; it must not be relegated to the periphery or banned," said Selinger.
The heads of state and government of the 20 most important economic nations met at the G-20 summit in Hamburg, including the presidents of the USA and Russia, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. The meeting was overshadowed by massive riots.
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
Federal Administrative Court decides on appeal
Likely · Within months
The trial surrounding the kidnapping of the Block children before the Hamburg regional court is being extended significantly. Due to numerous new requests for evidence, 15 additional dates have been scheduled until February 2027. The public prosecutor accused the defense of delaying the process.

Snap has reached a settlement in a Los Angeles lawsuit in which two plaintiffs accused Snapchat of being addictive and causing depression, anxiety and eating disorders. The settlement amount was not disclosed. Meta also recently averted a lawsuit through a settlement. Thousands of similar lawsuits are pending in the United States.

The Federal Court of Justice has rejected the appeal by Günter G., the former managing director of the Sheridan Group. He was sentenced to three years and nine months in prison for attempted tax evasion through cum-ex transactions.
In the Hamburg trial surrounding the alleged kidnapping of the children of entrepreneur Christina Block, an exchange of blows took place over 860 pages of new applications for evidence. While the prosecution speaks of kidnapping, the defense defends the move.

Federal Justice Minister Stefanie Hubig is pushing forward a reform of sexual criminal law. The draft provides for harsher minimum sentences for gang rape, longer statutes of limitations and the criminalization of sexual harassment even without physical contact.

The debate about the socialization of apartments in Berlin is reigniting. While supporters point to Article 15 of the Basic Law, legal experts doubt the constitutionality and point to stricter state rules and a planned federal investment protection law.