The criminal justice system

All my legal challenges regarding cases 14 O 307/23 and 14 O 141/25 were dismissed 
by the Regional Court. No correction was made.

Manfred Wehrhahn . Eisenmarkt 4 . 50667 Cologne

Cologne Regional Court (Landgericht Köln)
Luxemburger Str. 101

50939 Cologne

                                                                       June 19, 2026

Cases 14 O 307/23 and 14 O 141/25 – Cologne Regional Court



The proceedings were decided based on false, untrue, and lying testimony from 
Mr. Reiner Hömig—who, in fact, cannot qualify as a witness—and on the misuse of 
my own statements. Although it was clear to the judges that a creative studio 
collaborator is often referred to as a "producer" (even if, strictly speaking, 
the legal "producer" is usually the sound carrier manufacturer), this established 
legal position was overturned. I am demonstrably the sound carrier manufacturer. 
The ruling was handed down amidst these legal violations and arguments that were 
criminal in nature and hostile to the constitution and the law,

claiming that I myself had stated Mr. Hömig produced the song. I had made this 
statement with the proviso that I had engaged the singer and the BVB choir and 
covered all expenses for the studio music production. I proved this through an 
interview regarding the book release *Unser ganzes Leben – Die Fans des BVB* 
[Our Whole Lives – The Fans of BVB] by journalists Uli Hesse and Gregor Schnittker. 
Mr. Hömig confirms this in his own statement: "I, Reiner Hömig, worked for Mr. 
Wehrhahn in 1977 and created the song for him." The judges at the Cologne Regional 
Court simply disregarded this evidence. Mr. Hömig’s claim—that the singer Karl Heinz 
Bandosz was not in the studio and therefore did not record the song—could not 
possibly be true; this is refuted by the witnesses mentioned below and by Mr. Hömig’s 
own statements in interviews, just as an analysis of the audio recording—conducted 
by a state-authorized, impartial expert—would confirm his testimony to be false.

The two proceedings, 14 O 307/23 and 14 O 414/25, were conducted against me in 
a manner that was criminal and hostile to the constitution. There is no doubt about 
this, and it has been proven. These proceedings bear the hallmarks of a dictatorial 
system.

Uli Hesse and Gregor Schnittker – *Unser ganzes Leben* [Our Whole Life] – BVB Fans

BVB and Horst Mester, a chain manufacturer from Dortmund

The vinyl single

I intend to pursue the criminal proceedings and judicial decisions/rulings against 
the presiding judges at the Cologne Regional Court and the Cologne Higher Regional 
Court—regarding the aforementioned court cases—through the Cologne Public Prosecutor's 
Office and up through the various legal instances, including the Federal 
Constitutional Court, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, and the 
International Court of Justice in The Hague. Legal aid should have been granted for 
all these proceedings and stages. The Regional Court denied me this in order to push 
through its criminal machinations.

Mr. Hömig gave his false testimony in case 14 O 307/23. A few days ago, I received 
the court order/judgment addressing the multiple injunction suits, stating that the 
plaintiff, Reiner Hömig, had withdrawn them. However, the actual issue was not these 
injunction suits, but rather whether or not I hold the rights of use and exploitation 
for the song "Heja BVB." With the withdrawal of the case, the lie Mr. Hömig used to 
justify the judgment would have been swept aside. However, I had also lodged an appeal 
against the order or judgment and had not withdrawn that appeal. It was likely an 
attempt to simply make this fabricated lie disappear without further ado.

Regarding the outcome of case 14 O 141/25, I was stripped of the rights to the song 
"Heja BVB" after nearly 50 years; the justification was no longer based on Mr. Reiner 
Hömig’s testimony, but rather on the claim that he was the song's producer. This was 
justified on the grounds that I myself had stated that Mr. Reiner Hömig was named as 
the producer. And even if Mr. Hömig were entitled to the title of producer, he 
carried out the production on my behalf. The law, however, classifies such contributions 
as those of a creative collaborator. But even this is beside the point, because I 
acquired the rights of exploitation and usage when Mr. Hömig handed over the master 
recording for initial release. This constitutes a transfer of rights. The fact that 
Mr. Hömig waived his fee for his services in favor of his anticipated GEMA royalties 
suggests that he must have been working for me.

I am curious to see whether the Higher Regional Court of Cologne will continue to go 
along with these machinations.

Manfred Wehrhahn