Raid on Berlin SPD leader eleven days before the election. He is being investigated by prosecutors from the state governed by his own party

On Wednesday, prosecutors in Hanover searched the flat of Steffen Krach, leader of the Berlin SPD and its candidate for mayor, eleven days before the election to the Berlin House of Representatives. They are investigating suspected bribery in the sale of the site of a former hospital, a decision Krach made as head of the Hanover region. The details of the suspicion come from journalistic sources; the prosecution itself has confirmed only that proceedings are under way and that searches took place. The presumption of innocence applies, no indictment has been filed, and the party rejects the allegations. Two important developments followed on Thursday. According to Welt and Berlin’s Tagesspiegel, prosecutors are conducting proceedings against Krach in two cases, not one, and Die Zeit identifies the suspected offence as accepting benefits. Krach nevertheless remains the lead candidate, and Lars Klingbeil expressed the full SPD’s support for him.

One detail changes the picture familiar to Central European readers. The prosecution handling the case is based in Lower Saxony, the state governed by the SPD, where the justice ministry is headed by a Social Democrat. The usual framework in which a politician’s rival is suspected of being behind the prosecution therefore does not fit here. There is no evidence of political interference, but there is no evidence to the contrary either.

What investigators were looking for

The searches on Wednesday concerned three premises. The first was Krach’s flat in Berlin’s Schöneberg district, the second the Berlin SPD’s state headquarters in Wedding, and the third was in Hanover. Sources differ in their description of the third location: Tagesspiegel refers to Krach’s former official office, while taz says it was the party’s state headquarters. Tagesspiegel ↗

According to both newspapers, the suspicion centres on the sale of a hospital site in the municipality of Lehrte. Three years ago, Krach’s regional administration decided that the old hospital would be closed by 2030 and replaced with a modern health centre. As chairman of the supervisory board of a municipal network of ten clinics, Krach publicly said at the time which concept he considered better. Investigators are examining whether he received a gift from the bidder he supported, although it is unclear whether it was intended for him personally or for the SPD’s regional organisation. taz ↗

The case has an unusual feature. The bidder backed by Krach did not ultimately win the contract. According to Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung, it was G&W Vermögensverwaltung, whose premises investigators had already searched in May this year, also on suspicion of corruption. Süddeutsche Zeitung ↗

That afternoon, Krach told public broadcaster rbb that he had known about the investigation since Wednesday morning but did not know the details. “I have nothing to hide,” he said, adding that he wanted complete transparency. Berlin SPD spokesman Matthias Kuder rejected the allegations and announced full cooperation with the authorities. For tactical reasons, the prosecution declined to comment on the contents of the proceedings. Tagesschau ↗

There are two proceedings, not one. On Thursday, Welt and Tagesspiegel both reported that prosecutors in Hanover were investigating Krach in two separate cases. On Wednesday, only the case concerning the site in Lehrte was known. Welt ↗ Tagesspiegel ↗

The description of the alleged offence has also changed. Die Zeit refers to suspected acceptance of benefits, whereas Wednesday’s reports spoke of bribery. The difference between Sections 331 and 332 of the German Criminal Code is significant: in an acceptance-of-benefits case, it is not necessary to prove a specific quid pro quo for the gift, whereas bribery does require one. The prosecution continues to refuse to comment on the substance. Die Zeit ↗ Tagesspiegel ↗

Krach rejects the allegations and is defending himself with documents. Spiegel reports that he pushed back against the corruption suspicion; FAZ describes how he held up proof that a payment had been returned in his defence. Spiegel ↗ FAZ ↗

Why the timing is a sensitive issue in Germany

German prosecutors are not independent in the sense familiar to us. Under Sections 146 and 147 of the Courts Constitution Act, state justice ministers have the right to issue instructions to them, known as the Weisungsrecht, and are usually informed about significant proceedings. The existence of that power does not mean that anyone used it in Krach’s case, nor that the minister knew about the timing of the action in advance. Legal Tribune Online ↗

The left-wing newspaper taz put it directly in its headline: the action came at an inappropriate time. German law does not, however, recognise a precise election moratorium; prosecutors are bound only by the principles of proportionality and by the requirement not to unnecessarily damage someone’s reputation through an investigation. A search of a home is also generally ordered by a judge, not by prosecutors, who may order one themselves only in cases of imminent danger caused by delay. The decision is therefore not solely in the hands of the prosecutor.

The precedent is nevertheless strikingly close. Exactly five years ago, on 9 September 2021, prosecutors in Osnabrück raided the federal finance and justice ministries shortly before the Bundestag election, even though they had had the court orders for several weeks. The investigation was not directed against the then finance minister and chancellor candidate Olaf Scholz, but against unnamed officials responsible for the FIU customs unit fighting money laundering. The controversy concerned the timing and the way the prosecution informed the public about the action. Osnabrück is in the same Lower Saxony, but the justice ministry there was led by the CDU at the time. Tagesspiegel ↗

The matter was resolved only after the election. In February 2022, the Osnabrück Regional Court annulled the order concerning the justice ministry as disproportionate, and in June of that year the administrative court declared specific media statements by the prosecution unlawful. The search did not in fact take place at the justice ministry; the department handed over the documents voluntarily, and creating the opposite impression was one of the things the court criticised the prosecution for. Neither ruling proves a political order; they concern proportionality and communication. taz ↗

The situation into which the raid came

In the polls, the Berlin SPD is in fifth place behind the Left, CDU, AfD and Greens; the latest figures from individual polling agencies put it at 11 to 15 percent. In 2023, it had 18.4 percent, its worst-ever result in Berlin up to that point. As an outsider brought in to be its public face, Krach was supposed to stop the decline. This year he also became co-chair of the state organisation, and the day before the raid it was announced that Defence Minister Boris Pistorius would campaign with him the following Monday. Spiegel ↗

The SPD is not competing for first place according to the polls, but even a small shift in its support could determine what coalition emerges in Berlin. Commentators, including Austria’s Der Standard, find it hard to imagine a state government without the Social Democrats, so a weakened candidate is also an issue for parties that will have to negotiate with him. Der Standard ↗

A poll from the same day added another shift. According to Infratest dimap, the Left and CDU are contesting first place in Berlin neck and neck—exactly the constellation in which even a small shift in support for the Social Democrats could determine the coalition’s composition. Spiegel ↗ Tagesspiegel ↗

The candidacy is unchanged. According to Tagesschau, Krach remains the lead candidate and intends to continue campaigning; Lars Klingbeil expressed his support for him and the SPD’s solidarity. In the meantime, taz described the entire action as a question of having a sense of proportion. Tagesschau ↗ Die Zeit ↗ Tagesspiegel ↗ taz ↗

From Slovakia, it looks exactly the opposite

Slovakia has its own version of the question of how justice should treat a politician during a campaign, only it is turned upside down. While in Berlin the question is whether prosecutors should have waited, in Košice procedural steps are being taken, but the essential decision—the court’s ruling on the indictment—has still not been made after a year.

In mid-July 2025, a prosecutor indicted five people and two companies in the Valentín case. The case concerns overpriced purchases of contactless thermometers and four salt spreaders for the regional road authority, causing damage of more than €550,000; the charges followed the Valentín police operation in February 2023. The court has still not decided whether to accept the indictment and order a trial. Korzár ↗

There are two documented procedural obstacles, both concerning bias. The statutory judge and then practically all criminal judges at the Košice district and regional courts filed objections because one of the co-defendants is the brother of a Košice regional judge. In January this year, the Supreme Court therefore assigned the case to the Námestovo District Court. On 27 August, it issued an arrest warrant for Rastislav Trnka because the indictment could not be served on him even through the police. Trnka appeared voluntarily on 3 September, received the indictment, and the warrant was cancelled the same day. Aktuality.sk ↗

Trnka is accused, not indicted, although his opponents refer to him as indicted. The indictment is before the court, but no trial has been ordered; only then does an accused person become an indicted defendant. He is defending his position as an independent candidate, and the combined municipal and regional elections are on 24 October. The day before the Berlin raid, he announced a campaign without personal attacks, saying that the result should be decided by solutions for the region, not artificially manufactured conflicts. Pravda ↗

Read also: 56 candidates are running for eight regional governor seats. The Prešov Region has eleven, the Trenčín Region four

The two cases are therefore not the same situation, and pretending otherwise makes no sense. In Berlin, a procedural step came so close to the election that its timing is being discussed. In Košice, the indictment has been sitting in court for more than a year, and by 24 October it will probably still not be decided whether the case will proceed to trial. The voter is therefore going to the polls with a case that has neither been closed nor opened.

Limits of this perspective

We know almost nothing about the contents of the German file, and the prosecution has refused to comment on it. Everything known about the suspicion comes from journalistic sources in security circles, especially Tagesspiegel and Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung. It is therefore possible that the raid was a routine procedural step following the May searches of the other party in the case, rather than an event timed separately.

The minister’s party affiliation in itself neither proves nor disproves anything. Political interference in this case has not been demonstrated, nor has it been demonstrated that anyone ruled it out. Anyone drawing further conclusions from this is doing so without evidence.

The comparison with Slovakia also has its limits. German prosecutors are bound by ministerial instructions; the Slovak prosecution service does not have this instrument, and the dispute here concerns something else—public pressure and the speed of the courts. What the cases have in common is the question facing the voter, not the institutions answering it.

What hotinfo is following