German Federal Court Rejects Appeal of Military Officer Convicted of Plotting Attacks

A German federal court has rejected the appeal of 1st Lt. Franco A., a military officer who was convicted last year of plotting to attack prominent politicians. The court, which found that Lt. Franco A. held right-wing extremist views, sentenced him to 5 1/2 years in prison for preparing a serious crime meant to endanger the state, fraud, and violations of weapons laws. The Federal Court of Justice stated that his appeal was “clearly unfounded” and no legal errors were made to his detriment.

Lt. Franco A. came to the attention of authorities in February 2017 when he was arrested while attempting to retrieve a pistol he had hidden in a Vienna airport bathroom. Although he was released, Austrian authorities informed Germany, leading to an investigation. The investigation was triggered when his fingerprint matched one he had provided during his registration as an asylum-seeker.

Prosecutors alleged that Lt. Franco A. planned to kill prominent politicians and falsely blame the attacks on refugees. His targets reportedly included then-Justice Minister Heiko Maas and the head of an anti-racism organization. During the investigation, it was revealed that he had stockpiled four firearms, including an assault rifle, over 1,000 rounds of ammunition, and more than 50 explosive devices, some of which were stolen from military stores.

The Frankfurt state court, which handled the case, found that Lt. Franco A. had made the decision to carry out the attacks. However, it was unable to establish whether he intended to do so while posing as a Syrian refugee. At his trial, the soldier denied planning any attacks but admitted to hoarding weapons and ammunition in case public order collapsed in Germany. He claimed that by posing as an asylum-seeker, he aimed to expose flaws in the asylum proceedings.

In conclusion, the German federal court’s rejection of Lt. Franco A.’s appeal upholds his conviction for plotting attacks on prominent politicians. The court found no legal errors in the initial trial and deemed his appeal to be without merit.