Berlin Culture Senator Resigns Over Illegal Allocation of €2.6 Million for Antisemitism Prevention

Introduction

Sarah Wedl-Wilson, Berlin's culture senator, has resigned after a state audit found that €2.6 million in public funds for antisemitism prevention programs were given out without following proper rules and budget regulations. Mayor Kai Wegner accepted her resignation on Friday, five months before the city's parliamentary election.

Main Body

The resignation follows a report by the Berlin Court of Audit, released on Thursday. The report stated that the culture department's procedures for processing and giving grants to 13 projects were illegal. The auditors claimed that the funding decisions lacked clear criteria and that necessary technical and content reviews were not carried out. Furthermore, the funds were given to a list of projects put together by lawmakers from the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the senior coalition partner in Berlin's government. This happened despite internal staff warnings that the groups had not been properly checked. Wedl-Wilson, who is not a member of any political party, authorized the payments after CDU representatives pushed for quick approval. She had already dismissed her state secretary, Oliver Friederici, on Tuesday because of this issue. Opposition parties, including the Greens and the Left, accused two CDU lawmakers of improper influence, but the lawmakers deny this. A parliamentary committee of inquiry, set up in December, is investigating the allegations. One of the recipients was the Zera Institute, a think tank that received €390,000. Its director, Maral Salmassi, had previously called philanthropist George Soros a 'parasite' on social media and compared The Guardian newspaper to a Nazi-era publication. Furthermore, a researcher hired by the institute, Matthias J. Becker, was alleged to have falsely claimed a connection with the University of Cambridge; he denied misrepresenting his credentials. Salmassi described the scrutiny as a politically motivated press campaign. The audit focused only on the legality of the funding process, not on the quality of the projects' work. Authorities must now decide whether the organizations will have to repay the public funds. Wedl-Wilson, a British-Austrian national with a background in classical music management, took office in May 2025, replacing Joe Chialo, who resigned over severe budget cuts to the arts. Her resignation is the third departure from Wegner's cabinet since he became mayor in April 2023. Former transport senator Manja Schreiner left in April 2024 after losing her doctorate in a plagiarism case. The controversy happens at a time of rising antisemitic incidents in Berlin after the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, and the subsequent war in Gaza. Pro-Palestinian activists have criticized the definition of such offenses, arguing it is too broad and includes legitimate criticism of the Israeli government. Werner Graf, the Green Party's candidate to challenge Wegner in the September election, stated that the affair had caused serious damage to both the fight against antisemitism and public trust in democratic institutions.

Conclusion

The resignation of Sarah Wedl-Wilson marks the latest disruption in Berlin's coalition government ahead of the September parliamentary election. The case highlights tensions between political influence and proper administrative procedures in the allocation of public funds for sensitive social programs.

Vocabulary Learning

allegations (n.)
accusations / Claims that someone has done something illegal or wrong, often without proof.指控
Example:A parliamentary committee is investigating the allegations of improper influence.
audit (n.)
examination / A systematic review or inspection of financial accounts or procedures.審計
Example:The state audit revealed that the funding process was illegal.
criteria (n.)
standards / Principles or standards by which something is judged or decided.標準
Example:The funding decisions lacked clear criteria for evaluation.
misrepresent (v.)
falsify / To give a false or misleading account of something.虛假陳述
Example:The researcher was alleged to have misrepresented his connection with the university.
scrutiny (n.)
close examination / Critical observation or examination.仔細審查
Example:The director described the scrutiny as a politically motivated press campaign.

Sentence Learning

Furthermore, the funds were given to a list of projects put together by lawmakers from the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the senior coalition partner in Berlin's government.
This sentence uses the passive voice ('were given') to emphasize the action (giving funds) rather than the doer. The reduced relative clause 'put together' (which is short for 'which were put together') provides additional information about the projects without a full clause. The linking word 'Furthermore' adds information.此句使用被動語態('were given')強調動作(撥款)而非執行者。縮減關係從句 'put together'(完整為 'which were put together')提供關於項目的額外資訊,無需完整從句。連接詞 'Furthermore' 用於補充資訊。
This happened despite internal staff warnings that the groups had not been properly checked.
The word 'despite' introduces a contrast between the action (happening) and the warnings. The passive voice 'had not been properly checked' focuses on the groups not being checked, without specifying who failed to check them.詞語 'despite' 引入對比,表示事件發生與警告之間的矛盾。被動語態 'had not been properly checked' 強調團體未被檢查,而不指明誰未檢查。
Wedl-Wilson, who is not a member of any political party, authorized the payments after CDU representatives pushed for quick approval.
The relative clause 'who is not a member of any political party' provides extra information about Wedl-Wilson, using 'who' to refer to a person. It is a non-defining relative clause, set off by commas, adding detail without restricting the subject.關係從句 'who is not a member of any political party' 提供關於 Wedl-Wilson 的額外資訊,使用 'who' 指代人。這是一個非限定性關係從句,由逗號分隔,補充細節而不限制主語。
One of the recipients was the Zera Institute, a think tank that received €390,000.
The relative clause 'that received €390,000' defines which think tank is being referred to. 'That' is used as a relative pronoun for things. This is a defining relative clause (no comma) because it identifies the specific think tank.關係從句 'that received €390,000' 定義所指的智庫。'That' 用作指代事物的關係代詞。這是一個限定性關係從句(無逗號),因為它識別特定的智庫。
Opposition parties, including the Greens and the Left, accused two CDU lawmakers of improper influence, but the lawmakers deny this.
The conjunction 'but' shows a contrast between the accusation by opposition parties and the denial by the lawmakers. This structure presents two opposing viewpoints in a single sentence.連詞 'but' 顯示反對黨的指控與議員否認之間的對比。此結構在一個句子中呈現兩個相反的觀點。