Germany's silence: Testimonial injustice in the NSU investigation and willful ignorance in the NSU trial

We can currently see the formation of new nationalist and racist parties or tendencies within established to lean towards right-wing politics many European countries; from Alternative für Deutschland in Germany, Partij voor de Vrijheid (PVV) Netherlands, Lega Nord Italia, Vox Spain, Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs, Front National France, Sverigedemokraterna Sweden, Fidesz Hungary, Golden Dawn Greece, name only a few. At same time, there has been surge racist, fascist, antisemitic attacks Europe. Since 1991, Neo-Nazi gangs have attacked migrants members antifascist groups, burned down housing facilities for asylum seekers (including Ukrainian refugees 2022), disrupted social initiatives, spread fear (BfV, 2022; cf. Speit, 2021). However, most these activities were described as criminal action socially marginalized individuals, downplaying organized structure behind far-right and, thus, paving way more attacks.1 Part this paper is show how epistemic tools developed by epistemology ignorance literature help understand (a) why structures movements are unintelligible dominant frame intelligibility Europe (b) silence about shifts boundaries what be said done, having deeply problematic repercussions who feel safe This modest aim: By bringing into focus contexts injustice that not received much attention current understanding them with existing research debate on practices philosophy language, aims highlight some practices.2 In paper, I want concentrate series carried out Germany. From 2000 2007, Socialist Underground (NSU) succeeded murdering 10 people, one police officer, nine The victims Enver Şimşek, Abdurrahim Özüdoğru, Süleyman Taşköprü, Habil Kılıç, Mehmet Turgut, İsmail Yaşar, Theodoros Boulgarides, Kubaşık, Halit Yozgat, Michèle Kiesewetter. NSU also attempted murder another 43 times, committed three bomb Nuremberg Cologne, well 15 robberies. addition known organization—Beate Zschäpe, Uwe Mundlos, Böhnhardt—it remains an open question others involved. it assumed they had good connections at least 100–200 persons; including confidential informants, German intelligence service force, officials extreme parties.3 Yet, instead investigating even possibility terrorist organization relatives migrant communities demanded,4 tried pin all murders individuals communities; often than deceased without any substantial evidence. Only 2011, when two found dead third surrendered police, investigations turned their onto NSU. then, investigation trial its overshadowed hesitation thoroughly complexities crimes; form, witnesses dead, lied, documents disappeared, withheld important information facing (Förster, 2017; Kohl, 2011; Watch, n.d.).5 On July 11, 2018, concluded Munich, took place between May 2013 2018 Higher Regional Court Munich. It was longest largest trials history gained public interest because claims institutionalized racism force service. fact, 2 years court provide written verdict despite fact major importance.6 Five trial: Beate André Eminger, Holger Gerlach, Carsten Schultze, NPD-member Ralf Wohlleben. Zschäpe guilty sentenced life imprisonment, Wohlleben prison, Gerlach Schulze 3 Eminger half years. They charged inter alia account murders, serious arson, being organization, aiding abetting accessories 13 persons lost lives reasonably attributed Furthermore, focused merely those five failing establish links other extreme-right groups service; partly destroyed evidence simply ignored available evidence, testimonies several individuals. thus surprising faced criticism. cannot understand, you didn't address our questions. Why enough respect us explain questions no your verdict? […] very long. But down, asked us, heard witnesses—from others—what did families? transpired helpers group, came forth knew close state them? whole truth lie. didn‘t impossible. wanted listen before everyone else Nazis murders. duty. That would investigate happened. write said.7 (my emphasis) aim shed light Elif Kubaşık's To do so, use such Fricker's theory testimonial injustice. words sound familiar anyone read analysis Tom Robinson case Harper Lee's Kill Mockingbird. Here, Fricker shows which desperate Atticus Finch asks jurors duty determined prejudice Robinson's nature qua Black man says: “…In God, duty.” (1960, p. 210) Kubaşık says “We following, injustice; arguing officers adequately testimony due pernicious stereotypes failed acknowledge danger existent terror persistent framework according Germany does structure. comparison Robinson, identity work best intersectional; pertain (at least) religious, class stereotypes.8 then masks systemic problem Neo-Nazis institutions, parties, everyday life. so showing judges aforementioned investigative shortcomings concluding statement incentives given further relations both intelligibility, closely related notion white introduced Charles Mills. Finally, argue contribute climate far change done; robbed feeling country made home confirmed hate, provoked killings Walter Lübcke Halle Hanau (cf. My itself creates but harmful narrative suggest middle ground ignorance. way, structural contributes done society cannot. conclude thoughts role political philosophers theorists troubling cases. draw gap philosophy: networks remain mostly ignored; few philosophical papers similar structures.9 ‘… duty.’ Atticus's voice dropped, he away jury something [his daughter] catch. He himself court. punched Jem [her brother]. ‘What'd say?’ ‘“In believe him,” think that's said.’ asking “on moral legal convict if truly judge defendant guilty” (Fricker, 25), knows prejudices override this. Instead, give him credibility. “their immovably prejudiced perception speaker leads once gross failure appalling ethical grave practical consequence” 26). produced single instance prejudicial credibility deficit kind where tracks “the subject through different dimensions activity—economic, educational, professional, sexual, legal, political, on” 27). Hence, one-time occurrence recover context part set injustices. Structural grounded person's (assumed) identity. suffers just context: “[Tom Robinson] devalues his word blocks pursuits repeatedly every direction” 29). follows, identity-prejudicial deficit. is, will argue, play topic paper; investigation. make my argument, proceed follows: First, focusing her daughter Gamze background gain access Second, third, racial ethically epistemically problematic. Third, relate Gaile Pohlhaus's willful hermeneutical shift suffering yet frames responsibility investigators case. Not “doing resulted injustices right helped creating sentiments acts thriving.” November 5, 2013, wife murdered testified trial.10 While neither nor accused anything, parallels ways adequate argument show—through testimony—that credibility, dismissal description character husband father. lack case, points straightforward yet, well-being results Consider following illustration treat credible knowers reliable sources might deserve family person: Both called testify day after shot. she mother able sleep night murder, morning picked up police—visibly neighbors—and immediately separated station. brought room, waiting; point ok capable questioning; otherwise, told postpone questioning too emotionally strained scared. She informed could support questioned. whether father enemies affair; thought highly inappropriate shown photos ten foreign-looking men, know them. One look again, explained again seen men before. Then officer partner remarked realize showed men. laughed fun her. Let me repeat this: shot, questioning—without herself under investigation—and fail little bit sympathy plight during trial. describes caring father, likable outside family, testifies murdered. man, liked everyone; went walks together outside, people stop enjoy talking teenagers drawn jokes character. both—Elif Kubaşık—testify problems cope attack. explains son beaten street rumors selling drugs raided apartment shop dogs questioned neighbors families’ drug business and/or use. continues older refused go fingers younger year school insensitive aftermath father's murder. speaks own mother's anxiety; example, unable start vocational training scared take train thinking murderers back. For year, leave house. Her panic attacks. direct one-sided investigation, treated criminals institutions convincingly fascist against citizens taken seriously. still alone nowadays. apologies handled putting target family; none addressed verdict. mentioned suspicion early reporter March 2007 killed husband, answered convinced persons—eight Turkish Greek time—had immigrant backgrounds. time voiced believed Ms. K. [police officer] K.’s boss [chief running investigation], eliminated line investigation.11 connection murders; became 4, brutal videos confession paid informants milieu active. should known, Germany's federal office protection constitution (“Verfassungsschutz”) relevant material case; particular importance uptake; deserved. Thus, first claim suffered while obvious statements recounted above, injustice, group; migrants. seems indicative stereotypes. seriously, actively pursued family—despite Kubaşıks nothing activities. family—without underlying investigation—started on: carrying debit cards extra key storage room him, details easily someone owning shop, suspicious. When proved unfruitful raid indeed dealer, assumption attack must clan involved feud. happen feud “between tribes.” occasions member PKK mafia. explicit drew drugs, PKK, mafia common Muslim migrants; belief operate clans organizations. we here intersectional draws religious prejudices. Anti-Muslim form targets Muslims Muslims; irrelevant targeted actually practice religion. Several studies anti-Muslim widely accepted 44% 2020 27% population agreed allowed migrate years, 52% say Muslims. A recent study slightly higher acceptance stereotype prone become average (MEGAVO, 2022).12 intertwined welfare recipients lazy, drug-addicted, less educated, generally “antisocial.”13 significantly anti-Black United States, interesting parallels; Bierria, 2014) “by choice” are, directly responsible economic Hill Collins, 2000, Ch. 4). Taking account, likely explanation partly) illustrated activity drug-related crimes further, sentences tribes”; invokes generalization tribes “civilized” society. recognize acted detrimental well-being, anti-Muslim, words, characterized regard trial; plays differently. note cases caused prejudice; Fricker, sometimes “innocent error” 21). Innocent error excusable “is non-culpable” (2007, 21) lies simple human judgment perfect. well-meaning reasonable (or skilled) hearers mistaken award speaker. Someone failures behavior innocent errors—although considering died “innocent” clearly comes mind. negative prejudice, culpable. neglect one-dimensional “tribe”), culpable presiding judge. Still, respond Kubaşık—and Robinson—suffer (only) specified Fricker. Pohlhaus (2012) forward strong misinterprets According Pohlhaus, acknowledging situated interdependent gives rise interpretation wrongdoing (2012, pp. 716–718). speakers contrast classical epistemology's generic interchangeable knower; idea knower alike, rather, depending situation lived experiences come world lights. Importantly, mean each knowledge positions necessarily lead better others. As, Linda Alcoff Patricia Collins argued, approach interpret (Alcoff, 2006; 2000). specific create “habits expectation, attention, concern” (Pohlhaus, 2012, 717) shape interested in, at, turn attention. analysis, power obstacle gaining significant insights; exemplified Mills' famous sentence “whites general themselves made” (1997, 18). opposite true powerless vulnerable concerned interests experiences, expect concerns them; eyes theirs. W.E.B. du Bois' “double consciousness.” position implies resources used one's knowing suited situations marginally find themselves” 717). amounts dilemma: Those fit complex owing experiences. fuller above accordingly. means experience constant clashes experiences; coined “hermeneutical injustice.” Being collectively; entirely exist us. All resources, argues, dependent “must answer experiences” 718, emphasis original) while, mediated resources. Good intelligible useful ways. If that, develop ones. unequal marginalized, count equally. interdependence situatedness together: “The standards salient experienced itself, depend upon situatedness: I/we need care know) why?” original). ill-fit explaining powerful knowers. puts notice relates advantage ma