The lawsuit was filed by two Yemeni men whose relatives — including a police officer and an imam who had publicly opposed al-Qaeda — were killed in a U.S. drone strike. The plaintiffs argued that Germany bears partial responsibility because the Ramstein base functions as a satellite relay station for the U.S. drone program.

The court acknowledged Germany's duty to uphold human rights but concluded that the threshold for government intervention had not been met. It stated that Germany had acted within its foreign policy discretion by accepting the U.S. interpretation of lawful targeting in armed conflict.

“It could not be established that the U.S. is applying unacceptable criteria for distinguishing between legitimate military targets and protected civilians in the conflict in Yemen,” one judge noted.

Government Welcomes Ruling, NGOs Alarmed

Germany’s foreign and defense ministries welcomed the verdict, saying it validated Berlin’s legal position and reaffirmed the country’s ability to maintain international military partnerships without assuming liability for foreign operations.

However, the Yemeni plaintiffs denounced the decision as “dangerous and shocking,” warning that it signals impunity for countries that assist U.S. drone missions. Human rights organizations also criticized the ruling, saying it undermines international accountability.

The court emphasized that the German government has broad discretion when assessing the legality of third-party military actions conducted from its territory. The ruling may set a precedent for future cases involving extraterritorial military cooperation and civilian casualties.