They argue about just 200 euros. It is the small amount that makes this process spectacular in a very special way. It is a trial of the consequences of the Oktoberfest attack in 1980. Robert Höckmayr was twelve years old, the bomb exploded next to him. Two of his siblings were murdered. A good 40 years later, he is fighting for an increase in his pension, which he receives from the Free State of Bavaria in accordance with the Victims Compensation Act. So far it is 283 euros per month. He sued the Free State for 499 euros because his health continued to deteriorate. A settlement was agreed before the social court: 360 euros.
The right-wing extremist attack is the most momentous in the history of the Federal Republic. Twelve Wiesn visitors and the assassin were killed and 200 people injured. Among them Robert Höckmayr, who is marked for his life. He was operated 42 times and there are still fragments of bombs in his body. His legal dispute before the social court began five years ago, and in the end there is a monthly plus of 77 euros. Höckmayr’s lawyer Alexander Frey is pleased with the conciliatory tones of the Free State, which he has missed so far.
Decisive for the pension is the “degree of damage consequences”, and in turn, which health problems can be attributed to the attack. In court it becomes clear that the dispute over a certain amount is only the superficial question. The real issue is how the state treats a person whose youth was over in a second.
Höckmayr sees himself as a simulator
Robert Höckmayr, now 53 years old, said a few days before the trial that he had felt humiliated over and over again by the state, portrayed as a simulant and a liar, as someone whose problems had less to do with the bomb than rather with its origin. “Environment-related influences” was the cipher in one of the first reports when he was still a child: Growing up in Hasenbergl is said to have been responsible for problems, not the bomb. All these years he felt that he was perceived by the state and its officials “not as a person, but as a cost factor”. In court, lawyer Frey calls it “schofel and pathetic” how the state acted.
In one of his briefs, the lawyer outlines how the attack has shaped Höckmayr’s life to this day. Because of his fears, he avoided large crowds, didn’t go to concerts, didn’t go to the movies, didn’t go to markets. He avoided public transport and swimming pools because he would be ashamed of the scars on his body. “He doesn’t take the elevator and is often afraid in closed rooms.” After the attack, his client was no longer able to do sports. “He lost all of his friends,” he said, “feeling that he doesn’t belong”.
Höckmayr has constant pain in his legs and back, he can only walk short distances, is quickly exhausted, and his performance is severely restricted. The bomb also ruined Höckmayr’s career aspiration. He wanted to go to the fire brigade, police or armed forces, his physical ailments would have made that impossible. And there is something else that weighs heavily on Höckmayr: the lack of support from the state in the procurement of resources, the years of conflict with the Free State and decades of lack of interest in investigating the attack. It was only after 40 years that it was classified as a right-wing extremist terrorist act.
A former judge apologizes
A social judge plays a very special role in this process. In 2003, when the social court was already dealing with Höckmayr’s fate, Andreas Knipping had tried to dissuade and came to the end of the legal dispute. He considers a medical report to be “not very useful”, it does not help, just annoying examinations. 14 years later, this judge wrote a letter to Höckmayr – and apologized. His advice at the time against a psychiatric assessment was “from today’s perspective a misjudgment”. In the meantime, the research has continued and one knows about the lifelong consequences of traumatizing events.
That is why he, the judge, has now commissioned four specialist medical reports on Höckmayr’s state of health. In conclusion, Judge Knipping wrote: “I would like (…) to compensate for the deficits of the administration and my own insensitivity at the time to the best of my ability and ask for your understanding and forgiveness for my behavior in the proceedings at that time.” That was in 2017, and Judge Knipping is now retired.
The trial, which ended on Friday, is the latest chapter in a long series of attempts by Höckmayr to get some kind of compensation from the state for what has been suffered. It was Judge Knipping who in 2018 listed the many applications to the supply authority with which Höckmayr wanted to achieve a higher pension. Almost always in vain. When you count, you get at least nine rejections. Over the years, the degree of the consequences of damage has increased once, from 30 to 50, that was in 2008.
The 45th chamber of the court is now responsible, and the four most recent reports have long been available on Friday. The presiding judge reports on the previous back and forth, with a lot of talk about “deciding on things”. In between she says, almost apologetically to Robert Höckmayr, about whose life and suffering she speaks: “It’s a bit theoretical now.” The judge makes it clear that a comparison would be useful. “Purely arithmetically”, if you add up all the damage, it does not come to the required level of 70, but at most 60.
The representative of the responsible authority, the Bavarian Family and Social Center, which is subordinate to the Ministry of Social Affairs, casually mentions that “not everything went well” in the past, some he calls “highly regrettable”. On the other hand, he makes it very clear that his willingness to act is the maximum that the Free State can imagine: “The mathematics of pensions is already strained with the comparison.” Now Robert Höckmayr receives 77 euros more per month, retrospectively from 2015. “There is interest,” says the judge at the very end, before she praises the fact that an agreement has been reached “in a good atmosphere”.