Trespassing on airport grounds: offenses, penalties and known cases

At the airport fence runs one of the sharpest boundaries in everyday life. On your side you stand with a camera and a thermos; on the other side begins an area where only controlled personnel may go. Anyone who crosses this line without authorization quickly ends up with fines, criminal proceedings and damages – the glue-on protests on German runways between 2022 and 2024 showed this very clearly. Since March 2026 there has also been a separate criminal offense for it in the Aviation Security Act (Luftsicherheitsgesetz, LuftSiG). This article puts into context which rules apply, what the reform changed and how the known cases turned out.

The short answer

Anyone who enters airport grounds without authorization violates at least the Aviation Security Act (LuftSiG): mere access to the airside without authorization is an administrative offense with a fine of up to €10,000. If it is done deliberately and thereby impairs the security of civil aviation, it has been a crime since March 17, 2026, with up to two years in prison, up to five years in qualified cases. Offenses from the Criminal Code (StGB) almost always come on top – trespassing (Hausfriedensbruch), property damage if the fence is cut, coercion and disruption of public services in the case of blockades. And in the end the airport and airlines are in line with their damages claims.

Where the airside begins

Legally, the decisive term is the airside. It comes from European aviation security law and covers an airport’s movement areas – runways, taxiways, apron – as well as adjacent areas and buildings to which access is restricted. Within the airside there is also the more sensitive security restricted area, where stricter controls apply. Everything that is freely accessible belongs to the landside: access roads, parking lots, terminal halls, observation decks and the paths outside the fence.

In practice that means: the fence is the boundary. Exactly where the airside and landside meet is explained in detail in the article Landside, airside, security area. For this text a rule of thumb is enough: as soon as you leave a fence, a gate, a barrier or a cordoned-off area behind you without permission, you are where you do not belong.

The Aviation Security Act: fine and new criminal offense

The administrative offense

The basic prohibition is in Section 10 LuftSiG: nobody may gain access to the airside, for themselves or a third party, without authorization. Anyone who violates this commits an administrative offense under Section 18(1) no. 5 LuftSiG. The fine can be up to €10,000. No motive or endangerment is needed for this – unauthorized entry is enough. How the law is structured overall is shown in the overview The Aviation Security Act explained.

The March 2026 reform

For a long time, mere entry was “only” an administrative offense. Anyone who went onto the runway for protest purposes was prosecuted under the Criminal Code. After the glue-on protests, the legislature tightened the rules. The Second Act Amending the Aviation Security Act was passed by the Bundestag on February 26, 2026, promulgated in the Federal Law Gazette (BGBl. 2026 I No. 68) and entered into force on March 17, 2026. Besides the new criminal offense, it contains, among other things, rules on defending against drones.

The newly worded Section 19 LuftSiG provides:

• Basic offense: Prison of up to two years or a fine for anyone who deliberately gains unauthorized access to the airside and thereby impairs the security of civil aviation.
• Qualification: Prison of up to five years or a fine if a prohibited item is carried or the act is meant to enable or conceal another crime.
• Attempt: Even an attempt is punishable. So anyone stopped while cutting the fence cannot argue that they did not make it to the other side.

Important for context: criminal laws do not apply retroactively. The cases from 2022 to 2024 discussed below were judged under the law in force at the time.

The Criminal Code: which offenses typically come on top

The LuftSiG does not stand alone. In almost every intrusion onto airport grounds, prosecutors also examine offenses from the Criminal Code. The following overview shows the statutory maximum penalties – they say nothing about what is actually imposed in an individual case.

Offense	Provision	Typical occasion at the airport	Sentencing range
Trespassing	§ 123 StGB	entering the fenced grounds without permission	up to 1 year or a fine
Property damage	§ 303 StGB	cutting the fence, damaging surfaces	up to 2 years or a fine
Coercion	§ 240 StGB	blockade that keeps aircraft from taxiing or taking off	up to 3 years or a fine
Resisting enforcement officers	§ 113 StGB	resistance during removal	up to 3 years or a fine
Disruption of public services	§ 316b StGB	paralyzing flight operations	up to 5 years or a fine
Dangerous interference with air traffic	§ 315 StGB	concrete danger to people or significant property	6 months to 10 years

Two points are important here. First, trespassing is prosecuted only upon complaint – but airport operators regularly file one in such cases. Second, dangerous interference with air traffic is tied to a high hurdle: a concrete danger must have arisen. In the Frankfurt blockade in July 2024, the prosecutor’s office denied exactly that because flight operations had been stopped immediately. Investigations there were opened for coercion, trespassing and property damage.

Civil law: the most expensive part

Under criminal law, many proceedings end comparatively mildly. Financially, though, it can really hurt. When an airport has to stop operations, costs arise for several parties: for the operator through deployment, repairs and lost fees, for airlines through canceled flights, diversions, crew and passenger costs. They can sue the perpetrators for these damages under civil law – and each participant for the full sum if several acted together.

Courts can also order an injunction, combined with a coercive fine in case of repetition. Unlike a criminal fine, damages are not based on income or guilt but on the damage actually incurred. That is where the real risk lies.

Known cases in Germany

Between late 2022 and summer 2024, activists of the now-dissolved group “Letzte Generation” (Last Generation) repeatedly entered German airports, mostly through cut fences, and glued themselves to taxiways or near runways. The following cases are well documented.

BER, November 2022

In November 2022, activists entered the grounds of Berlin Brandenburg Airport, and flight operations were temporarily suspended. The airport company subsequently took participants to court and demands damages for the costs of the interruption of operations.

Hamburg, July 2023

On July 13, 2023, the first day of Hamburg’s summer vacation, ten activists cut the fence at Hamburg Airport and glued themselves near the runways. According to the prosecutor’s office, air traffic stood still from 6:00 to 9:50 a.m. 68 flights were canceled, 14 diverted. The indictment put the damage from the outage at €131,000, plus about €13,000 for the fence and cleaning the asphalt.

The consequences on two levels:

• Under civil law, the Hamburg Regional Court, on a suit by Eurowings, ordered the ten participants to pay damages of more than €400,000. The judgment is final.
• Under criminal law, the Hamburg District Court issued a warning under juvenile criminal law in April 2026 against one participant who was a young adult at the time of the act – for disruption of public services, resisting enforcement officers, property damage and trespassing. The judge made clear that neither a climate emergency nor civil disobedience justifies the blockade. Proceedings under adult criminal law are pending against other participants.

Düsseldorf, July 2023

On the same morning, activists also glued themselves down at Düsseldorf Airport. 48 flights were canceled, two diverted. The Düsseldorf District Court in September 2025 convicted a defendant who was 20 at the time of the act of trespassing, property damage, coercion and resistance – here too with a warning under juvenile criminal law. The prosecutor’s office had demanded six months of suspended juvenile detention. In parallel, airlines of the Lufthansa Group asserted six-figure damages, and the airport sued for just under €49,000.

Cologne Bonn and Frankfurt, July 2024

In summer 2024 a second wave followed. At Cologne Bonn Airport, activists glued themselves to a taxiway on July 24, 2024; operations stopped for about three hours, and 31 flights were canceled. The next day, according to police, eight people entered the grounds at Frankfurt Airport. Shortly after 5 a.m., flight operations were stopped completely; around 7:30 a.m. the first takeoffs and landings resumed, and by 8 a.m. all runways were released. According to Fraport, about 270 of roughly 1,400 scheduled flights were canceled that day.

Nuremberg, August 2024

On August 15, 2024, two female activists cut a hole in the fence at Nuremberg Airport and glued themselves to a taxiway. According to media reports, air traffic stopped for about 80 minutes. The Nuremberg District Court sentenced one of the participants in March 2026 to ten months in prison, suspended, and 150 hours of community service – for disruption of public services, property damage, trespassing and coercion in 272 cases. The high number results from the passengers on board the affected aircraft. At the time of reporting, the judgment was not final.

A completely different case: Hamburg, November 2023

Not every intrusion is protest. On November 4, 2023, a man drove his car through the barriers of a gate at Hamburg Airport and onto the apron with his four-year-old daughter. A custody dispute had preceded it. The hostage-taking dragged on until the following afternoon, and flight operations were interrupted for more than 20 hours in total. The Hamburg Regional Court sentenced the man in June 2024, among other things for hostage-taking, to twelve years in prison; at the time of reporting the judgment was not yet final. The case significantly sharpened the debate about securing access roads and gates at German airports.

What this means for you as a spotter

The cases above have nothing to do with plane spotting. Still, they are worth a look because they show how seriously airports, police and courts take every boundary violation. A few clear rules follow for you.

A few situations from practice:

• Your cap blew over. Stay outside. Call the airport’s number or approach the nearest patrol. It is embarrassing, but cheaper than any of the alternatives.
• The gate is open. An open gate is not an invitation. Authorization to enter comes from ID and assignment, not from a missing lock.
• A hole in the fence. Do not use it, not even for a lens. A tip to the airport or police makes sense – many airports are actually glad to get tips from spotters, as the article Spotters as security partners shows.
• The drone crashed. Drones have no business at the airport anyway; what you risk is covered in Drones at airports. If it lies on the airside, you absolutely do not retrieve it yourself.

How to behave at the fence in general and how to deal with checks is described in the articles Proper behavior at the airport fence and Police checks while spotting. What the airport may allow or prohibit on its own property is explained in the article on the airport operator’s house rules.

And abroad?

In other countries too, entering the airside without authorization is prohibited and in places punished far more severely than in Germany. The details differ, the basic rule does not: the fence is the boundary. What applies in Austria and Switzerland is in Plane spotting in Austria and Plane spotting in Switzerland; for other destinations, Spotting abroad helps.

Conclusion

Trespassing on airport grounds is no trivial offense but works on three levels: the Aviation Security Act punishes even unauthorized entry and, since March 2026, makes it a crime under certain circumstances. The Criminal Code supplies trespassing, property damage, coercion and disruption of public services. And civil law quickly turns a few hours on a taxiway into a six-figure bill. The glue-on protests of recent years played out exactly this mixture. For spotters, one single, simple rule remains in the end.