The men — Faisal, Ahmed Saeed and Khaled Mohmed from the Ali Jaber family alleged that Germany bears legal and political responsibility for the deaths of their relatives, because the drones were operated via the massive US military base Ramstein in Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany.
#German #NATObase use for #Yemen #DroneStrikes challenged @codepink @ECCHRBerlin @jeremyscahill @AlMonitor @nyrb https://t.co/WriaqtL0Ff
— Bruce Rosen (@10024Fellow) May 27, 2015
The case was brought by legal charity Reprieve and the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), and was based on the allegation that the use of US military bases on German soil is against the German constitution. The Ramstein base is contracted to the US on condition that it does not do anything that violates German law.
#German Court dismisses lawsuit of #Yemeni victims, but confirms #Ramstein role in US drone strikes. Victims have right 2 access 2 justice!
— ECCHR (@ECCHRBerlin) May 27, 2015
The Administrative Court of Cologne dismissed the claim, but allowed the human rights groups to take the case further. Speaking exclusively to Sputnik, Andreas Schüller, ECCHR legal representative of the three claimants said:
"We are not disappointed because, although the overall result is not that positive, there are some smaller issues in the judgement that are quite promising. One of them is that the court confirms our arguments over the use of the Ramstein base in Germany. It plays a crucial part of the drone war and it can no longer ignored."
He said this would allow his clients to continue their legal claim that the Ramstein base used by the US for its drone wars is still illegal under the German constitution. "The court said an appeal is possible. The court indicated that the claim was not unfounded. The German Government has a wide discretion in decision over foreign policy matters, which cannot be interfered with by a court," Schüller told Sputnik immediately after the decision.
He said the next step for the claimants would be to go to a higher administrative court in Germany, then to a federal court and finally, to the German constitutional court, before taking the matter the European Court of Human Rights.
Germany Cannot "Play the Innocent"
He said his three Yemeni clients had greeted the decision with some degree of satisfaction, but were aware of the long-term fight for justice. "The court granted them the right to bring the case, so that's positive and [they] understand the long way forward on the appeal. We will continue and see a number of positives in the judgement," Schüller told Sputnik.
First met Faisal here, at @Reprieve town hall in #Yemen Apr '13. Been seeking justice together since. (w/ @BShtwtr) pic.twitter.com/sohuYasNdH
— Cori Crider (@cori_crider) May 27, 2015
"Today's decision allows the German government to continue to play the innocent," said ECCHR General Secretary Wolfgang Kaleck after the hearing.
"See nothing, hear nothing, say nothing — with this strategy the government cannot and will not be able to meet its obligation to prevent human rights violations committed by the USA via German territory. On the contrary, with this approach Germany is making itself complicit in the deaths of civilians as part of the US drone war."
Kat Craig, Legal Director at Reprieve, said: "Without Germany — and other western allies — the US could not fly the drones that kill innocent civilians like my client Faisal's family in Yemen. For too long, the drone program has been allowed to operate in the shadows — away from judicial and public scrutiny. Whilst we may have lost today, this hearing was an important step in the direction of greater transparency and accountability."
