Overview of the Verdict
On 19 June 2026, the 6th Criminal Senate of the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf sentenced 50‑year‑old German‑Polish computer scientist Martin S. to three years in prison for multiple state‑security offences. The conviction relates to a Darknet platform that published so‑called “death lists” and “death sentences” against politicians and other public figures and actively promoted and organised violent actions against them.
Charges and Legal Findings
The state‑security senate convicted Martin S. of several offences, including instruction for the prohibited manufacture of Molotov cocktails and unconventional explosive and incendiary devices, terrorism financing, instruction to commit a terrorist offence, and dangerous dissemination of personal data. The court treated the platform as more than hate speech, viewing it as an integrated security threat that combined targeting, technical instructions and a financing model for violence.
The court found that Martin S. operated the Darknet site “Assassination Politics” from at least 17 May to 10 November 2025. There he created “Strafakten” that combined real personal data, invented criminal accusations such as “high treason,” and pronouncements of “death sentences.” High‑profile political figures, ministers, scientists and other public figures were listed as targets. The platform also solicited cryptocurrency donations in Monero to finance real attacks and published illustrated instructions for constructing Molotov cocktails and improvised explosive and incendiary devices.
What the Platform Did and Who Was Targeted
“Assassination Politics” functioned as a marketplace‑style platform for targeted political violence. It published lists of individuals with personal details and demanded action. Targets included former chancellors and other senior politicians, federal ministers, scientists—especially those prominent in the pandemic debate—as well as judges and prosecutors. The operator explicitly called for donations to be made in Monero so that a promised bounty could be paid to attackers if an assassination was accomplished.
Methods, Manuals and Recruitment
Beyond naming targets, the site provided step‑by‑step and sometimes illustrated instructions on how to build Molotov cocktails and make simple explosive or incendiary devices. It also published lists of members and supporters of political parties, creating both ideological and logistical material for potential attackers. The platform’s combination of doxxing, calls for assassination and technical guides formed the basis for the court’s assessment that the operation was designed to encourage and professionalise ideologically motivated violence.
Sentence, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors
The court imposed a three‑year prison term. In aggravation, the judges emphasized that Martin S. intended to incite third parties to commit murder and that he had prior relevant convictions. In mitigation, the court credited his admission that he had established and run the site and noted that, until his arrest and the site’s shutdown by the federal criminal police, no funds had actually been paid out for attacks. The court also deprived him of the right to hold public office and to exercise public voting rights for three years.
Appeals and Legal Status
The judgment is not final. Both the defendant and the federal public prosecutor may file a revision to the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof). The case raises legal questions about the precise scope of terrorism financing and the criminality of preparatory steps before an attack is actually carried out, which the higher court may be asked to clarify.
State Security Context and Public Debate
Authorities framed the case as a state‑security matter rather than mere online provocation. The court and prosecutors argued that the threshold between protected expression and criminal incitement was clearly crossed when personal data, explicit death sentences, bounties and technical attack instructions were combined. Defenses that treated the project as a provocation or a test of security were rejected as implausible. The decision fits a recent trend of tougher enforcement against online threats, who lists and digital calls for violence.
- Digital platforms that pair doxxing with instructions and financing can constitute terrorism‑related offences.
- Cryptocurrencies like Monero were used as the intended financing mechanism but no payments were completed before law enforcement shut the site down.
- Courts will weigh intent to incite violence and prior convictions heavily in sentencing.
- Appeals could clarify how preparatory acts of terrorism financing are punished under German law.
Implications and Key Terms
- Darknet
- Death lists
- Assassination Politics
- Monero and cryptocurrency financing
- Molotov cocktails and improvised explosive devices
- Terrorism financing
- State security (Staatsschutz)
- Doxxing and dangerous dissemination of personal data
- Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf
- Bundesgerichtshof (possible appeal)
