Young individuals with male gender and non-German origin are linked to knife violence, claims Slowik.
*Security in Berlin is reportedly at a peak during the UEFA European Football Championship, as stated by Police President Slowik. However, she's noticed a rise in stabbings in the capital, mainly from young perpetrators, as mentioned in an interview with ntv.de.
ntv.de: The UEFA European Championship is ongoing, attracting a barrage of visitors to the capital, with fan miles crowded. While the overall mood is positive, there's a concern about security. Is this concern valid?
Barbara Slowik: In fact, there's been an ongoing abstract high risk of Islamic attacks in Germany for some time. However, we currently have no concrete threat alerts. Despite the EUFC often serving as a platform for terrorist groups, we've never had this level of security as we do now, not just in Berlin, but in other hosting cities. As the Police President of Berlin, we're utilizing all available technical and personnel resources to keep the city secure. This includes Internet specialists, Super-Recognizers, behavioral experts, drone defense, and constant communication with all German security agencies and the International Police Cooperation Center in Neuss.
In Gelsenkirchen, there were disturbances caused by violent fans over the weekend. How is the Berlin police preparing for hooligans?
During the group stage, there's no imminent threat from violent hooligans that we can identify, as no high-risk games are being held in Berlin. However, we're in contact with organizations, fan support, and our undercover officers who've been familiar with the ultra and hooligan scene for years. This exchange is happening both nationally within Berlin and internationally through the International Police Cooperation Center. Officers from all participating nations are sharing information about Ultras or hooligans.
In the past few days and weeks, there've been several fatal stabbings. Does stab violence play a role in the EUFC security plan?
Indeed, this was factored into the planning. Weapons and dangerous objects are banned in the fan zones, and fans are screened at entrances by stewards. This method worked well during the opening match on Friday, as a suspicious item detected at the entrance control was immediately investigated and removed. Additionally, we have the option to randomly search people at crime-prone locations, including knives, if deemed proportionate and necessary. We also keep the question of additional knife prohibition zones open. We're monitoring the situation, gaining insights continuously, and this will be crucial for us after the group stage, based on which matches and fans we anticipate in the city.
Are such knife-related weapon prohibition zones also planned outside the EUFC in Berlin? Following the stab attack in Mannheim, Federal Chancellor Scholz called for a nationwide expansion of these zones.
We must use caution when establishing weapon-free zones in Berlin as there's no singular hotspot for stabbings. We see focus areas in some crime-ridden areas where we can search without cause. Where we deem it appropriate, we'll consider setting up such weapon restriction zones, but nothing is set in stone at the moment.
In recent days and weeks, there've been multiple stabbings nationwide. Has there been an increase in stabbings in Berlin?
In the past few years, we've seen an increase in Berlin, even among children, adolescents, and young adults. Perpetrators of stabbings are getting younger. I agree with the call for stricter gun control in Lower Saxony.
Stabbings are frequently linked to migration in public debate. What's the assessment of this?
The police criminal statistics differentiate between German and non-German suspects. Over the past few years, we've seen an increase in overall violent crime, as well as among non-German suspects in the capital. Non-Germans are overrepresented. In plain terms: According to our numbers, violence in Berlin is predominantly young, male, and has a non-German background. This also applies to stabbings.
Repeatedly, perpetrators of violence are psychologically disturbed individuals and are in a psychotic state at the time of the crime, as was the case most recently on a Sunday in Hamburg. Are there preventive measures from a police perspective?
If someone has not been noticed before, the response teams must handle the situation appropriately. If we know someone needs psychological care, the social psychiatric service of the responsible district office is available. However, there's not always sufficient personnel in the social psychiatric service, and this can take some time. In short, more personnel in the social psychiatric service would help us as police. In a city like Berlin, there's a larger number of people on the move who are psychologically unstable or in personal exceptional states. In acute situations, we take people to psychiatric institutions ourselves. Then it's up to the doctors on site to determine self-harm or harm to others - or not.
When considering the sometimes open drug trade in Berlin or the New Year's Eve 2023, an impression arises that the police are no longer taken seriously by parts of society. Is that so?
How can respect be regained among some segments of the population?
The approach of the Berlin Police is: We extend a helping hand and engage with anyone ready to engage with us. We maintain a friendly demeanor, but also remain firm. When a certain line is crossed, we respond with swift force, based on the law. I believe we've made this clear in recent years. Lately, we've demonstrated this at Palestinian gatherings since October 7, during the last New Year's Eve, or at the Palestinian Congress in April. There, the Berlin Police acted decisively and declared the event terminated after just two hours.
The Berlin Police have frequently dissolved Palestinian gatherings. At the same time, the right to assembly is a precious asset. Can the balance, whether a gathering will be dispersed or not, always be achieved?
For us, this is often several assessment stages. In principle, a gathering is announced and it usually proceeds as planned. Except, we have signs that the gathering leader is unable to maintain the gathering without violating the law or the location is problematic. We double-check. Or, if we have concerns or have witnessed potential rule violations. Before we ban a gathering, we typically check restrictions as a milder means to prevent potential legal violations. At Palestinian gatherings, we routinely prohibit certain flags, signs, or slogans. During the gathering, we act decisively against violations of our restrictions and crimes. At Palestinian gatherings, we act immediately, as it's primarily about propaganda crimes that often escalate. For other gatherings, where we have the opportunity to possibly isolate a troublemaker or criminal from the crowd at a later time, we wait. The option to exclude gathering participants also exists. We use every tool at our disposal, always with the goal of protecting the right to assembly.
Does this mean you treat Palestinian gatherings differently?
Every gathering is always individually assessed by us, including Palestinian gatherings. If the slogan "From the river to the sea" is deemed a crime by us as police, we must adhere and enforce this. The decision isn't made by us. It's made by the prosecution and eventually by a court. During the dispersal of university protests, professors criticized that freedom of expression was being stifled.
My stance is clear: In doubt, for freedom of opinion, in doubt, for freedom of assembly. We step in only when communication between university leadership and protesters is no longer possible and crimes are present. We can advise, if someone asks us about experiences when people barricade themselves in a room and occupy it. Then our experience is that it often leads to property damage. But for how long someone wants to communicate in a university - we have no influence on that. Regardless of the current Middle East conflict situation, I believe as a society we must engage in discussions and endure them. We must create spaces for discussions once more, so that people do not get drawn into individual radical or even extreme groups.
Marc Dimpfel talked with Barbara Slowik
