Each year in Germany, between 8000 and 9000 people are sent to prison for riding public transport without a ticket. This is because many cannot afford to buy a ticket in the first place, receive a civil fine from the transit authority which they cannot afford, and are then charged with a criminal offense, often resulting in high fines, as in this case. People who are unable to pay for a criminal fine are sent to prison with a so-called Ersatzfreiheitsstrafe (EFS).

In this case, it is unclear whether the defendant knows that even though he is sentenced to a fine, he could nevertheless end up in prison because of EFS. The fine is more than three times the regular rate of social benefits, and his previous convictions for fare evasion suggest that he has had difficulties affording a monthly ticket in the past (though he had one at the time of the sentencing). Even at €9, the “social ticket” for social benefit recipients is not affordable for everyone, though the judge seems to assume this. The very high fine to which the man is sentenced effectively punishes poverty and will further increase his economic precarity.

A man enters the courtroom in jeans and a light jacket. He seems unsure of himself and at times during the trial it is unclear whether he can follow the proceedings. He states that he has applied for early retirement due to an impairment, but currently receives Bürgergeld. He has no lawyer and sits isolated in the courtroom with his head bowed forward.

He is accused of riding public transport without a ticket a total of six times over a period of just over a year. During the hearing of evidence, he says that he has nothing to say, he simply forgot his ticket. The judge asks if he now has a monthly pass, which the defendant confirms, showing it to the judge and prosecutor. After briefly discussing the man’s personal information, the court turns to his previous convictions: There have been “quite a few” since 2003, the judge remarks, and only reads out the most recent ones: one sentence for fare evasion eight years ago, and another one four years ago.

In his plea, the prosecutor considers the man’s statement and the fact that he now has a monthly ticket to speak in favor of the defendant, while the previous convictions speak against him. He demands a fine of 120 days at €15. Since there is no lawyer to plead for the defendant, the judge merely asks him for his last words. He has nothing to say and then there is a break. After a while, the defendant asks, seemingly anxious: “But I can go home afterwards?” The judge replies with a smile: “Yes, you can go home with your monthly ticket.” She hands down a sentence in line with the prosecutor’s plea, at a total of €1,800, explaining her reasoning: “It’s great that you now have a monthly pass. Please keep it that way. You can manage the €9, even from your early retirement pension.” She concludes the hearing, saying: “Thank you, that’s it.” The man stands up, turns around and leaves the room. He smiles, seemingly relieved.