The dismissal is based on three central allegations: First, violation of the “moderation rule” [a law in Germany according to which all civil servants in Germany must be “moderate” in their political expression]. The reason given was my comments on social media. My former employer drew up a list of statements I had made, for example that Israel in its current form is a racist and genocidal state.

Yes, I received a twenty-page letter justifying my dismissal. It’s absurd. The principle of moderation must be applied in relation to reality. And the reality is that Israel is being investigated for a potential genocide by the International Court of Justice. When I describe the state of Israel as a genocidal state, it is based on classifications made by renowned human rights organizations as well as Holocaust and genocide researchers.

Also, my superiors claim that I have violated my duty of neutrality and loyalty [a law in Germany according to which all civil servants must behave politically neutrally while at work and be loyal to their employer]. Which doesn’t make any sense. All the accusations against me relate to statements made outside of work. The only thing I am accused of during work is wearing political symbols on a business trip, namely small watermelon earrings. I traveled with a superior for six days, and it wasn’t even mentioned once. The third charge is a violation of the “duty of good conduct.”

It’s a duty to behave in a benevolent manner toward your employer. They’re referring to the fact that I said in an interview with Democracy Now! that I was suspended and didn’t know why, which is true. It’s not plausible to me how the allegations justify a suspension or dismissal.

Then there’s a mix of other allegations. For example, we have a news ticker on our intranet that includes a contact email address. I misinterpreted it as an option for feedback. Why else would there be a contact mentioned in each news ticker item? After reading a ticker message justifying the killing of civilians in October 2024, especially children, with the human shield theory, I wrote to that address and asked them to adhere to minimum journalistic and legal standards. This is constructed as an abuse of my ministerial position. They claim I would have attacked the freedom of the press.

What is also mentioned is an open letter written together with professors and artists, including many international ones, including some from Israel. When the letter was first published, I added my position, as all signatories listed their position and employers. On December 10, I received a call from a colleague, not management. I was told that the letter was OK, I just needed to remove my affiliation to the ministry. I complied immediately.

This is now construed as usurpation of authority. They argue I wanted to create the impression I was speaking on behalf of the ministry. That’s pretty far-fetched; after all, we very well know the stance of the German federal government on Israel-Palestine. It was obviously a dissenting letter. I am also accused of bringing my political views into my work. This is justified by the fact that allegedly some colleagues no longer want to work with me since the Bild article that appeared on December 12.

As a result of the article, I was suspended and have never set foot in the office since. However, I was never told which or how many colleagues allegedly no longer wanted to work with me. The first letter I received stated the ministry had received numerous administrative complaints. I then asked them to be more specific. Let me read the response: “As of December 8, 2024, first complaints were received from various citizens about the activities of federal officials on social media. Among other things, one person pointed out that she had described Gaza as the world’s largest concentration camp. Another claimed, among other things, that they had ‘aggressively accused former MP Volker Beck [a right-wing genocide supporter and lobbyist, chair of the German-Israeli Society and various other lobbyist groups] of antisemitism.”

I guess it started with a smear campaign on X launched by Malca Goldstein-Wolf [another right-wing genocide supporter and influencer] who posted various accusations eventually picked up by Bild.

Actually, quite the contrary: I was initiating conversations with them. In March, I approached my superiors and said that I thought what was happening in Gaza was unacceptable and that we, as the human rights unit, had to take a stand. I explained my inner conflicts, that I was torn. I asked for advice; I asked what to do. One of my superiors pointed out that off-duty I was free to do what I felt to be right. She didn’t necessarily agree with me but would appreciate us talking. Everyone at my level of hierarchy knew about my stance. I had some arguments, but these were respectful.

At some point, I decided I couldn’t go on like this and wanted to step up my work with MERA25. I discussed my political ambitions with everyone in my hierarchy, including my department head, three levels above me in the hierarchy. Everyone wished me luck, and most even praised me for my political commitment. I explicitly informed them Israel-Palestine would be my central campaign theme. No one saw a problem with that. I had even spoken to the person responsible for my civil service status: no warnings, nothing. Now, in the letter of dismissal it sounds as if I had been cautioned several times. That’s not true. It was the other way around; it was me seeking a dialogue. I was told that it was OK for me to be politically active.

Nevertheless, the Bild article was quickly followed by my suspension. I had a meeting with the human resources department. It wanted to know if I would continue to express my opinion. I said yes, it’s my basic right. Who knows? If I had said, “I’m sorry, I’m going to keep quiet from now on,” there might not have been any consequences.

Partly. A meeting was scheduled for December 16, 2024. I wanted my legal counsel to be present. I was told this wouldn’t be possible because it was an internal meeting. I specifically asked about this at a second meeting we had on January 2. The staff council had informed me that if the ministry refused to let me have my legal counsel present, no matter could be discussed that would affect my employment status. Therefore, I didn’t assume that I would be fired. At the second interview, they handed me a letter and told me that I was dismissed effective immediately. That was not accurate as well. The letter was a letter of intent, and I had two weeks to respond with a statement. I sent it in mid-January, and then nothing happened until the federal elections [held on February 23] were over. Immediately after the federal elections, I received my dismissal.

Yes, immediately afterward. I am not aware of any other cases in which candidates for a federal election have been fired and stripped of their civil servant status after an election campaign.

Yes, of course. There is even an additional protection against dismissal in political election campaigns, namely that you cannot be dismissed for precisely these political reasons. Of course, my political statements were related to my campaign. My statements on social media are in line with our party program. But it doesn’t seem to interest them. Their aim is to prevent the expression of my views on Israel-Palestine. I have pointed out several times that I [was running an] election campaign and that this is a central issue for our party.

In my opinion, the whole process is clearly unlawful and a breach of the constitution. The behavior of the Federal Ministry of Labor is a blatant violation of my basic rights, my political rights, and the constitution. I will take legal action.

Of course not. Felix Klein [the federal level “antisemitism commissioner”] demonstrated this by his unwavering public support for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. The German government is deeply complicit with this genocide. It supplies arms as well as moral, political, and military support.

Freedom of expression was celebrated big time. It is a sign of the current constitution of this state. When it comes to Palestine, it is very obvious that for one side there is no more freedom of expression and assembly. There is rampant violence at rallies; houses and apartments are constantly being searched; people are being locked up and deported.

But this doesn’t apply to all areas of life. While I was suspended, a case came to light in Bavaria in which a civil servant confessed to raping an acquaintance. The court gave him only eleven months‘ probation so that he would not lose his civil service status. This is an expression of a patriarchal society. And when this comes together with Israel-Palestine, it’s even worse, as we saw on March 8 [International Women’s Day] at the rally in Berlin. At the demonstration, women were publicly beaten by the police; they were subjected to sexualized violence in the streets. They were publicly violated by a state entity.

It’s another puzzle piece in the authoritarian turn. It didn’t start with me. Marjam Samadzade was dismissed from her position as secretary of state as early as October 2023 [for her support of Palestine]. Cases like these are meant to set a precedent. I am currently receiving many messages from people who are afraid of the consequences of speaking up. But it is crucial to continue. Especially as a lawyer, I cannot accept the slashing of fundamental rights. If we don’t resist the more and more repressive, aggressive, and authoritarian state, then the authoritarian turn will continue unperturbed, and at some point it will simply be too late.

I don’t know yet. It’s all very fresh, and I still have to process. But I’ll definitely be filing a lawsuit. I have two job offers and don’t think I’ll be on the street anytime soon. I’ll find something else.

I don’t want my case to set a successful example of silencing. On the contrary: it’s an opportunity to speak up and resist. We have fundamental rights. It is a great achievement that we have fought for over centuries. We have to fight for them.

Also, as Germans, we have a duty to prevent genocides. Silence is complicity, no matter what. There is a case before the International Court of Justice. There is substantiated evidence of the actions of Israel being a genocide. But the legal question really is only of secondary importance: tens of thousands of Palestinians, most of them children, have been killed ruthlessly. The primary issue is not whether it is genocide or not, but that we must not tolerate it. It is barbaric and uncivilized. This is a political conflict that must be resolved politically. Violence has never brought an end to violence. Every war is a failed policy. And our politicians get paid a lot of money to find political solutions and not drive us into wars. We must hold them accountable.