The official figures

On 10 January 2026, Germany’s Federal Minister of Health Nina Warken declared that Kennedy’s public statements about the prosecution of dissenting doctors in Germany had “no factual basis”. She asserted that criminal prosecutions had been brought “exclusively in cases of fraud and forgery of documents”.

Six days later, data analyst Tom Lausen, a member of the Study Commission of the German Bundestag, together with the lawyers Ivan Künnemann LL.M. and Sven Lausen, replied in an open letter to the US Secretary of Health. With figures drawn from the Public Prosecutor’s Offices themselves.

The result: the Minister’s statement is factually incorrect. In Germany, doctors are not convicted of fraud (§ 263) or forgery of documents (§ 267). They are prosecuted exclusively under § 278 of the German Criminal Code (StGB), the offence of “issuing incorrect health certificates”. And the data available so far show: the scale is considerable.

Investigations and convictions

The following figures are drawn from official responses by the Attorney General’s Offices of five federal states (Berlin, Rhineland-Palatinate, Hamburg, Saxony, Baden-Württemberg), together covering around 30 % of the German population. They concern the criminal prosecution under two central provisions of the Criminal Code:

§ 278 StGB
Issuing false health certificates

Targets primarily the issuer — that is, the physician. Anyone who knowingly issues a medical certificate falsely stating another person’s state of health commits an offence. Under German law, incitement is also punishable — which means patients can also be prosecuted if they are accused of having pressured a doctor into issuing such a certificate.

§ 279 StGB
Use of false health certificates

Targets solely the use of such a certificate — i.e., patients who have presented a certificate whose accuracy a court later rejected. Typical cases: producing a mask-exemption certificate at a shop, in schools, when stopped by police, or on public transport.

1.521
Investigations 2020 – 2024 (known)
Criminal investigations under § 278 of the German Criminal Code
408
Convictions 2020 – 2024 (known)
Convictions under § 278 of the German Criminal Code
2.887
Investigations 2020 – 2024 (known)
Criminal investigations under § 279 of the German Criminal Code
966
Convictions 2020 – 2024 (known)
Convictions under § 279 of the German Criminal Code
Criminal investigations under § 278 of the German Criminal Code Doctors and patients (as inciters). Data from 5 federal states: Berlin, Rhineland-Palatinate, Hamburg*, Saxony*, Baden-Württemberg* — together ≈ 30 % of the population
* For Hamburg, Saxony and Baden-Württemberg only conviction figures are available — included here as a minimum estimate of investigations.
Convictions under § 278 of the German Criminal Code Doctors and patients. Data from 3 federal states: Hamburg, Saxony, Baden-Württemberg ≈ 20 % of the population
Criminal investigations under § 279 of the German Criminal Code patients only. Data from 5 federal states
Convictions under § 279 of the German Criminal Code patients only. Data from 3 federal states
All figures at a glance (count per year)
Category 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Σ 2020–2024
Criminal investigations under § 278 of the German Criminal Code 39 46 444 557 362 112 1.521
Convictions under § 278 of the German Criminal Code 2 3 8 137 203 57 408
Criminal investigations under § 279 of the German Criminal Code 7 103 1.121 1.207 390 66 2.887
Convictions under § 279 of the German Criminal Code 1 27 344 487 93 15 966

Every conviction necessarily presupposes a preceding investigation. Where a federal state disclosed only conviction figures (Hamburg, Saxony, Baden-Württemberg), the actual number of investigations there is higher.

The shape of the curve is consistent across all four time series: a flat baseline in 2019, a sharp rise in 2021 / 2022, and an equally sharp drop in 2023 / 2024, a direct mirror of the public pressure of each phase of the pandemic.

What is actually at issue: § 278, not § 263 or § 267

The Federal Minister of Health’s public portrayal, that the criminal proceedings concern “exclusively fraud and forgery of documents”, is not compatible with German legal practice.

§ 278 StGB: the offence under which all convictions are handed down

Doctors who have been convicted in connection with Covid medical certificates are prosecuted under § 278 StGB (“issuing incorrect health certificates”). In individual cases, specific documentation offences under public health law are added (e.g. § 74 IfSG). This has been established by binding case law of Germany’s highest courts: the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) and the Higher Regional Courts.

Why not § 263 or § 267?

Fraud (§ 263 StGB) and forgery of documents (§ 267 StGB) are excluded for reasons of legal logic: a medical certificate involves neither financial damage (fraud) nor a deception about identity (forgery). Doctors in Germany are not convicted under these provisions at all.

The consequence

The assertion that it is “exclusively” about fraud and forgery therefore disseminates objectively false information, and defames the doctors already convicted by associating them with offences for which they were neither convicted, nor legally could have been convicted.

What these figures mean

The visible 1,521 investigations under § 278 StGB cover only around 30 % of the German population. For the remaining 11 federal states, among them the most populous, such as North Rhine-Westphalia (≈ 17.9 million), Bavaria (≈ 13.4 million), Lower Saxony (≈ 8.1 million) and Hesse (≈ 6.4 million), the official figures have so far not been disclosed.

On a purely arithmetical basis, this suggests a nationwide order of magnitude of around 5,000 investigations under § 278 StGB alone, plus a multiple of this in proceedings under § 279 StGB (use of incorrect health certificates by patients).

This projection is conservative. It does not assume particularly aggressive prosecution in the federal states that have not provided figures, only that the intensity of prosecution is comparable to the five that did.

Whether the actual figure is higher or lower can only be determined once the remaining eleven Public Prosecutor’s Offices provide the information.

What the Federal Republic is still withholding

The following federal states have so far declined to respond to enquiries about the state of investigations and convictions:

  • Bavaria (approx. 13.4 million inhabitants)
  • North Rhine-Westphalia (approx. 17.9 million inhabitants)
  • Hesse (approx. 6.4 million inhabitants)
  • Lower Saxony (approx. 8.1 million inhabitants)
  • Schleswig-Holstein (approx. 3.0 million inhabitants)
  • Brandenburg (approx. 2.6 million inhabitants)
  • Saxony-Anhalt (approx. 2.2 million inhabitants)
  • Thuringia (approx. 2.1 million inhabitants)
  • Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (approx. 1.6 million inhabitants)
  • Bremen (approx. 0.68 million inhabitants)
  • Saarland (approx. 1.0 million inhabitants)

Together, these federal states are home to around 58.8 million people, roughly 70 % of the Federal Republic. As long as the responsible Public Prosecutor’s Offices decline to respond, the true scale of criminal prosecution under §§ 278 / 279 StGB remains unknown.

Sources and documentation

The figures are drawn from named responses by the following Attorney General’s Offices, requested by the editorial team of WELT am Sonntag in October 2024:

  • Baden-Württemberg (≈ 11.3 million): Dr Martina Müller-Ehlen, Senior Public Prosecutor and Press Spokesperson of the Attorney General’s Office Koblenz
  • Hamburg (≈ 1.9 million): Mia Sperling-Karstens, Senior Public Prosecutor and Press Spokesperson of the Public Prosecutor’s Offices, Attorney General’s Office Hamburg
  • Saxony, Dresden (≈ 4.0 million): Heike Teitge, Senior Public Prosecutor, Attorney General’s Office Dresden (Division I)
  • Berlin (≈ 3.7 million): Sebastian Büchner, Senior Public Prosecutor and Press Spokesperson of the Berlin Judicial Authorities
  • Rhineland-Palatinate (≈ 4.1 million): Jan Dietzel, Senior Public Prosecutor and Press Spokesperson of the Attorney General’s Office Stuttgart

All responses are included in the letter to US Secretary of Health Kennedy as complete email correspondence and can be independently verified.

The authors of the letter

Tom Lausen

Data analyst. Member of the Study Commission “Review of the Corona Pandemic and Lessons for Future Pandemic Events” of the German Bundestag. Since the beginning of the pandemic, he has published empirical analyses on vaccine side effects, excess mortality and criminal prosecution statistics.

Ivan Künnemann, LL.M.

Specialised practice in criminal law and medical law. Representation of doctors and patients, as well as soldiers and civil servants, in proceedings concerning vaccinations and vaccine injuries. Active in criminal defence and in medical-law proceedings.

Sven Lausen

Main areas of practice: criminal law and medical law. Representation of doctors and patients, as well as soldiers and civil servants, in proceedings related to mask mandates, vaccinations and vaccine injuries. Trial representation for several criminally prosecuted doctors, in particular in appeal proceedings (Revision) before the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), and in proceedings before the Federal Administrative Court.

Our heartfelt thanks go to Tom Lausen, Ivan Künnemann and Sven Lausen for making the data available and for their permission to publish it here.

Their work is an important contribution to the process of reckoning, and to ensuring that facts do not disappear into official silence.