Germany’s controversial Section 188 of the Criminal Code has come under renewed scrutiny after courts imposed substantial fines on citizens for insulting Chancellor Friedrich Merz online.
According to prosecutors in Heilbronn, a Facebook user was ordered to pay a fine of more than 2,000 euros after referring to Merz as “Lügenfritz” (“Lying Fritz”) in a comment posted under a police announcement about the chancellor’s visit to the city last year.
The public prosecutor’s office argued that the remark had the potential of “undermining confidence in the victim’s integrity, because it was liable to foster further negative prejudices or even aggression among like-minded individuals.”
Another user received the same punishment for calling the Chancellor “Ftzn Frieder”—a vulgar insult—while other cases involving terms such as “Pinocchio,” “Lügen-Kasper” (“lying clown”) and “Lügenbaron” (“baron of lies”) were either dropped or dismissed by prosecutors.
One case involving the insult “Lackaffe” (equivalent to “pompous fool”) was suspended after the defendant agreed to pay €100.
The prosecutions were brought under Section 188, a provision that criminalises insults, defamation, and slander against political figures when authorities believe the remarks could damage public trust in their integrity or hinder their political work.
The controversy has been fuelled by a series of high-profile prosecutions in recent years.
Among the most widely discussed was the case of Bavarian pensioner Stefan Niehoff, whose home was searched after he shared a satirical meme referring to then-Economy Minister Robert Habeck as a “professional idiot.”
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, a leading figure in the liberal FDP party, has also reportedly filed thousands of complaints against online critics accused of insulting her.
Critics argue that the law effectively grants politicians a privileged legal status unavailable to ordinary citizens, and that politicians should be expected to tolerate harsh criticism and ridicule.
The provision has become increasingly controversial as the number of investigations has surged in recent years. Official figures show thousands of cases are now being referred annually to prosecutors, with authorities and activist reporting organisations actively monitoring online speech.
The latest rulings prompted fresh condemnation from the opposition Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). In a statement, the party argued that “special rights for politicians must not exist” and that all citizens should be treated equally before the law.
As Sabine Beppler-Spahl writes for europeanconservative.com:
Paragraph 188 is unworthy of any free society. In a democracy, citizens must have the right to express their frustration with those who govern them. Attempts to suppress that frustration mean evading precisely the debates and struggles that demand political clarification—and that should therefore be seen as hallmarks of a healthy democracy, not threats to it.
Efforts to repeal the provision have so far failed. In January, the Bundestag voted against a proposal by the AfD to abolish Section 188, with all other parliamentary groups opposing the motion.
Zoltán Kottász is a journalist for europeanconservative.com, based in Budapest. He worked for many years as a journalist and as the editor of the foreign desk at the Hungarian daily, Magyar Nemzet. He focuses primarily on European politics.
