12.04.2001, 4^th day in court

The Berlin RZ Court Case is stayed.

With todays decision of the court, to amalgamate the court case with the case against Rudolf Sch., the court case has to start again.

In the afternoon, the court also decided that the accused will remain in remand.

After sitting only 40 minutes, the Presiding Judge Gisela Hennig proclaimed the staying of the current trial. The Senate didn't announce a date for the new court case. Previously, the First Senate of the Berlin High Court decided, that Rudolf Sch. will be tried before the court together with the other accused. Presiding Judge Hennig claimed " court-economical" reasons for the decision.

Contrary to that, councilors Jaspar v. Schlieffen and councilor Silke Studzinski, had opposed the amalgamation in a written statement. Rudolf Sch. is accused of the same crimes as the other 4 accused. In addition , the Federal Prosecutors charged him with "ringleasdership".

Continuation of detention unconstitutional?

At the beginning of thr 4^th day in court, councilor Eisenberg informed the court, that he has filed a complaint at the Constitutional Court about the continuation of the detention, which is unreasonably long. Eisenberg accused the Court and The Federal Prosecutors Office, to lenghten the trial. They hadn't done anything to speed up the proceedings. Accordingly, there has been neither a clearing up of the alledged facts nor a reading of the charges. This is a elementary violation of the order to speed proceedings.

He called it a scandal, that there hasn't been a bail hearing for the accused since more than three month.

Court orders continuation of detention.

After the end of the court case, (spoken) bail hearings were held in the court room for all 4 accused. In a non public meeting, all accused and their councilors were allowed, one after the other, to file applications for the lifting of the detention orders or to apply for bail.

After several hours of deliberation, the first Senate of the Berlin High Court announced in the afternoon, that all applications were denied. Therefore the accused remain in remand. Although all accused had been living in stable social circumstances, the court believes in reasons to escape. Other reasons for the complaints, i.e. mistakes in the court procedures, slow proceedings by the Federal Investigator, a unreasonably long time of detention, were not regarded by the court in relation to the expected sentence.