"Antisemitism is socially unacceptable."

The Berlin Police Department established the Office of the Antisemitism Commissioner in 2019. The position is held in combination with the head of the Central Office for Prevention at the Berlin State Office of Criminal Investigation (LKA). It was the first position of its kind at a police agency in Germany. Winfrid Wenzel, who is 55, has held the position since May 2022. He previously held various other positions, including head of the fire department and deputy head of the homicide department. He also served as press spokesman for the Berlin police. Before joining the police, he studied history and political science for four semesters. Our interview with him took place in his office at Columbiadamm on 17 April 2023.

Mr. Wenzel, what are your responsibilities as Antisemitism Commissioner of the Berlin Police?

I am the agency’s central contact person for all issues relating to antisemitism, both externally and internally. I answer press inquiries and am available to politicians in an advisory capacity as well as to the Jewish community in all its diversity. Within the police, the antisemitism commissioner is responsible, among other things, for training courses and for ensuring that this issue is given the attention it needs internally. It is important to raise awareness about what is happening politically and to sensitize people to religious contexts. This is also relevant in the context of policing and police tactics. For example, it is important to know the significance of Yom Kippur when evaluating dangerous situations. Basic political knowledge is relevant for the entire range of police work, including for police units patrolling the streets. This was demonstrated, for example, during the anti-Israel demonstrations on 8 April.

How are antisemitic crimes registered?

Antisemitic crimes are registered in the so-called PMK mode, which means politically-motivated crimes. As soon as they are recorded, they get passed on to the criminal police reporting service, which uses uniform nationwide statistical criteria to facilitate comparability between the 16 federal states. The cases are classified according to specific headings and subtopics. The four major categories are violent offenses, propaganda offenses, terrorism, and other offenses. “Terrorism” is self-explanatory and concerns crimes prosecuted under articles §129 or §129a of the Criminal Code. “Violent offenses” include killings, robbery, grievous bodily harm and sexual offenses. “Propaganda offenses” have become a huge phenomenon, especially on the Internet, and were further fueled by Corona. It refers to the spread of antisemitic narratives and conspiracy ideologies. “Other offenses” include minor damage to property, insults, things like that.  

A case could consist of three or four different offenses. A typical example: If a perpetrator spray-paints a swastika on a synagogue and then calls the intervening rabbi a “rotten Jew,” then in the first legal assessment there would be a link between property damage, incitement and defamation. The overall facts of the case would be assessed as clearly antisemitic with regard to the crime execution and presumed motive.

What role do offenses committed on the Internet play?

The Internet is an important issue for us. This is true alone in quantitative terms because about 50% of all antisemitic crimes take place on the Internet and also because investigative work on the Internet is subject to dynamic changes and can reach de facto limits. This is quite sobering for the police: The German penal code, for example, criminalizes statements that are not punishable abroad, such as in the U.S. In many countries, Holocaust denial is considered “free speech” and is not punishable, so many tele-media operators do not feel compelled to provide us with user data that would allow us to identify the responsible parties. This means that crimes that are clearly punishable under German law may not get prosecuted due to the lack of support from social media providers. This is a problem that we have not yet resolved.

How high is the detection rate in the various crime categories, and how often are perpetrators identified?

Criminal investigations on the Internet tend to be more difficult than in the real world, and often the crimes – unlike bicycle thefts, for example – are not linked directly to Berlin. For instance, if a citizen here in Berlin informs the police about antisemitic incitement on social media and the initial investigation determines that the Stuttgart public prosecutor’s office is responsible, then this enters the Baden-Württemberg statistics and Berlin never hears about it or does so only by chance. This is an example of the peculiarities of statistical recording. Overall, 40-50% of all antisemitic crimes have been solved in recent years. In 2022, for example, 181 of 380 cases were solved. During the Corona pandemic in particular, we had a high percentage of suspects identified in the context of various events, some of which were conspiratorial and ideological. In this context, cooperation with the public prosecutor’s office as well as with external organizations, such as the Research and Information Center on Antisemitism (RIAS), was very useful, especially with regard to evaluating and assessing whether certain statements were antisemitic. The most striking example was people wearing yellow stars with the word “unvaccinated” on them. In these cases, the public prosecutor’s office quickly determined that wearing these stars should generally be classified as a case of trivializing the Holocaust.  This allowed the security forces at these events to act confidently because the initial suspicion of a criminal offense could generally be assumed. This made very clear how important the close network and exchange with the public prosecutor’s office is.

We keep hearing about antisemitic and racist chat groups, even within the police. How is this handled?

On the one hand, there are immediate preliminary investigations within labor law, which means an investigation is opened to determine whether misconduct – as it applies to civil service law – has occurred. Police officers justifiably have to fulfill a wide range of requirements, including loyalty to the constitution, rule of law, recognition of the free democratic basic order and the requirement of neutrality, to name a few. In the case of trainees and students, this investigation can quickly lead to the question of whether we have a legal right to break ties with the officer. This is the clear line taken by the agency’s management: In cases of extremist behavior, misconduct, doubts about a few officers or a group’s actions with regard to the rule of law, a dismissal will follow. That is the first part, which is restrictive and takes place within the agency. The second step is the evaluation of criminal proceedings. This means that preliminary proceedings are initiated, handled by the LKA and forwarded to the public prosecutor’s office. It is then determined whether, in addition to the assessment under civil service law, there will also be criminal sanctions, such as a fine or imprisonment.

Are training courses offered that specifically address this topic?

Of course. The exact procedure, however, depends on the specific situation. If, for instance, it is a permanent unit that has drawn attention in this regard, or a group of classes at the police academy which may have just come together four or five weeks ago – the approach will differ. On the one hand, it is a matter of addressing the issue directly with superiors. On the other hand, targeted training courses are offered by the police academy and by us at LKA Prevention. They focus on values and attitudes and deal with media competence. We want to raise awareness of responsibility, the role model function and the special role that the police have in society. The expectations we place on ourselves and those imposed on us from outside are vastly different. Unlike in many other professions, it is existentially important that every police officer acts in accordance with the rule of law and based on a stable set of values. 

There are training modules on hate crime, extremism prevention and deradicalization as well as on comparatively low-threshold programs on topics such as the recommendations we developed in our prevention department regarding discrimination-sensitive language. If, for example, colleagues of a department are observed using language and communication that is not perceived as sufficiently respectful, emphatic, or contemporary, they turn to us. In my view, this has changed and improved the situation within the police enormously.

Today there is a much greater awareness of the importance of communication in our profession, and how much we are expected to adapt to social developments. Many statements that were normal or at least widely used 10 or 15 years ago are no longer acceptable in police communication today, with good reason, because they can be perceived as exclusionary and discriminatory.

Has anything changed since the position of Federal Commissioner for Jewish Life and the Fight Against Antisemitism was established?

I really cannot comment on the specific impact of this new position, but what I am certain of is that the establishment of antisemitism commissioners has raised awareness of the issue’s relevance. They are an important sign that antisemitism is socially unacceptable and should not be tacitly tolerated in a constitutional state. It is a sad phenomenon that goes back many hundreds of years. Today, however, unlike 10 or 15 years ago, there is a social consensus that antisemitism is not a trivial offense. It is a hate crime because it is not just individuals being attacked; people are being made into victims by proxy in order to frighten, upset and endanger others. The establishment of a federal commissioner gives a strong signal that such behavior will not be tolerated by the constitutional state.

Mr. Wenzel, thank you for this talk.

The interview was conducted by Dr. Jakob Müller, Education & Research Department, and Dr. Ruth Preusse, Communication & Public Relations Department