In the case of BVerwG 2 WDB 3.22, the Federal Administrative Court addressed the disciplinary proceedings against a former Bundeswehr officer who espoused sovereign citizen ideology, rejecting the legitimacy and sovereignty of the Federal Republic of Germany. The former soldier, born in 1956 and retired in 2018 as a senior medical officer, was subjected to disciplinary proceedings based on allegations largely consistent with a more comprehensive indictment dated March 21, 2022. The initiating order by the Federal Office for Bundeswehr Personnel Management on August 11, 2021, led to the withholding of 30% of her pension, which she sought to have revoked. The Military Disciplinary Court initially annulled this withholding order on November 25, 2021.
The allegations against her included sending letters to state officials, such as the mayor and the head of the tax office, and making public statements rejecting the legitimacy of the Federal Republic of Germany. In these communications, she expressed beliefs such as the Federal Republic being a commercial entity rather than a sovereign state, the non-existence of valid laws post-1956, and the continuation of the German Reich. She declared herself as sovereign and claimed that the Federal Republic was operating under invalid laws without sovereign power. Furthermore, she engaged in conversations with police officers and military personnel, reiterating these views.
The Federal Office for Bundeswehr Personnel Management had initially ordered the withholding of 30% of her pension due to these actions, which was later annulled by the Southern Military Court. The Federal Administrative Court reviewed this decision and reinstated the pension withholding, emphasizing that the former soldier’s actions violated her duty of political loyalty even after her retirement. The Court found her statements to be a direct attack on the free democratic basic order of Germany, aligning with the ideology of so-called “Reich citizens” who deny the legitimacy of the modern German state. The Court concluded that her actions warranted the maximum disciplinary measure of pension withdrawal, highlighting the seriousness of her conduct against the democratic principles of the state.
You can find the case here (thanks to a great researcher who found the case).