Skip to main content
NOPE
Medium reported severity

Lower Saxony CDU parliamentary group employee reportedly posted an AI-generated sexualized video of a colleague in a private staff chat group

Welt, dpa (in Tagesspiegel, news.de and t-online) and a press release of the CDU parliamentary group in the Lower Saxony state parliament report the following. On 17 January 2026 an employee of the parliamentary group posted a short AI-generated video showing a colleague in a sexualized manner in a private WhatsApp group connected to the group's staff. The Hannover public prosecutor's office had viewed the video, and a spokesperson said it was obviously an AI montage. After the group's leaders were informed (on 27 March according to press reports), the employee who created the video was dismissed without notice and a second employee, who had reportedly asked chat members in January to delete the video and keep silent, was suspended. The group informed the prosecutor's office, which said, as reported on 1 April 2026, that it had received no criminal complaint. On 9 July 2026 dpa reported, citing the prosecutor's office, that the Wennigsen local court had fined the former employee, who had made the video with the colleague's picture without consent and shared it in a chat group, 30 daily rates for a violation of the Kunsturhebergesetz, and that the decision is final. The colleague and the former employee are not named, and no statement by the colleague appears in the sources read.

AI system
Unidentified video tool
Occurred
17 Jan 2026
Reported
1 April 2026
Event location
Germany
What the AI did
Depicted or impersonated the person
Reported harm
Exploitation or Abuse
Whose AI use
Someone else’s AI use
Setting
Work · Privacy
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 3 underlying accounts
7 claims: 7 reported. 7 open questions
People reported harmed
1 person

AI system as recorded: Unspecified AI video tool (not named in the sources)

Reported harm

A colleague was depicted in a sexualized AI-generated video that was posted in a private WhatsApp group connected to the parliamentary group's staff. The Hannover public prosecutor's office said, as reported by dpa, that the former employee made the video with the colleague's picture without consent, and a local court fined the former employee for a violation of the Kunsturhebergesetz. No statement by the colleague about the effect on the colleague appears in the sources read.

What remains unknown

  • No statement by the depicted colleague appears in the sources read. The colleague's own experience and the date the colleague learned of the video are not stated in the news reports read. An NDR report that these sources cite was not retrieved.
  • The AI tool or service used to make the video is not named, and the reviewer did not see the video.
  • The creation date of the video is not stated. The posting date of 17 January 2026 is reported, and no source dates the creation to an earlier year.
  • The number of chat members and recipients is not stated beyond several employees. Recipients are not counted as harmed.
  • The prosecutor's statement reported on 1 April 2026 said there was no investigation of the alleged creator and no indication of an insult offence. The later fine under the Kunsturhebergesetz is reported second-hand, and the court decision and the daily-rate amount were not seen.
  • The alleged creator's stated purpose (to show the dangers of AI manipulation) is an account passed on through the group's letter and a spokesperson. It is not tested by any source.
  • The Welt and Business Insider original reports of the chat facts were reached only through the Welt article of 3 April and the dpa text. The Business Insider report was not read.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. The Hannover public prosecutor's office had viewed the video, and a spokesperson called it obviously an AI montage in which a real picture of the colleague had presumably been montaged into the video, and said software that allows this exists (Tagesspiegel, dpa). Welt calls it an AI-generated short video. No tool is named and the reviewer did not see the video.

7 claims: 7 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported On 17 January 2026 an employee of the CDU parliamentary group in the Lower Saxony state parliament posted a short AI-generated video that showed a colleague in a sexualized manner in a private WhatsApp group connected to the group's staff.

Causal attribution. Welt gives the date and content in its own voice, and dpa quotes a Hannover public prosecutor spokesperson for the same date. The parliamentary group calls it a possible deepfake in its own release. Welt, dpa and the group may share one underlying account, so the claim stays reported. The video was not seen by the reviewer.

  • welt.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Am Nachmittag des 17. Januar 2026
  • welt.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    In einer gemeinsamen privaten Whatsapp-Chatgruppe postete ein ... ein KI-generiertes Kurzvideo, in dem eine weitere ... Mitarbeiterin der Fraktion in eindeutig sexualisierter Weise dargestellt wurde
  • tagesspiegel.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Das Video sei bereits am 17. Januar in der Chatgruppe eingestellt worden.
  • cdultnds.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    die Verbreitung eines möglichen KI-Deepfakes mit sexualisiertem Inhalt im Rahmen einer privaten WhatsApp-Gruppe mit Bezug zur Mitarbeiterschaft der Fraktion
Reported The Hannover public prosecutor's office had viewed the video, and a spokesperson said it was obviously an AI montage in which a real picture of the colleague had presumably been montaged into the video, and that software which allows this exists.

Causal attribution. The statement is a spokesperson's description after the office viewed the video and is not a forensic finding. Welt and Tagesspiegel relay the same dpa inquiry. No tool is named.

Reported According to reports by Welt and Business Insider that CDU circles confirmed to dpa, an employee asked the other chat members in January to delete the video and keep silent, and the parliamentary group's leaders were informed on 27 March.

Causal attribution. The account rests on Welt and Business Insider reporting with confirmation from unnamed CDU circles. The group's spokesperson declined to comment. Whether the depicted colleague learned of the video earlier is not stated in these sources.

Reported The employee who created the video was dismissed without notice at the end of March 2026, and the employee who had called for silence was suspended.

Causal attribution. Welt and Tagesspiegel report the dismissal and suspension from the same Welt and Business Insider account, and dpa repeated them on 9 July. The group did not comment on the employment measures in the sources read.

  • tagesspiegel.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Dem Bericht zufolge wurde der Mitarbeiter, der zum Stillschweigen aufgerufen hatte, am Dienstag suspendiert. Der Ersteller des Videos sei fristlos entlassen worden.
  • welt.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    wurde der Mitarbeiter, der das Video offenbar erstellt hat, noch am selben Tag freigestellt und inzwischen fristlos gekündigt
  • news.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Der Ersteller des Videos wurde Ende März entlassen, ein weiterer Mitarbeiter der Fraktion suspendiert.
Reported The parliamentary group informed the Hannover public prosecutor's office. As reported on 1 April 2026, the office said it was examining the matter, was not investigating the alleged creator and had received no criminal complaint, and named a suspected violation of the Kunsturhebergesetz if a photo had been altered.

Causal attribution. The parliamentary group's release is its own account of its conduct. The prosecutor's statements are relayed by dpa. They describe the state of the matter on 1 April 2026 and do not describe the later outcome.

Reported According to the prosecutor's spokesperson, who was relaying the parliamentary group's letter to the office, the alleged creator posted the video in the chat to show the dangers of AI manipulation, and the video was later deleted from the chat.

Causal attribution. This is the alleged creator's stated purpose as passed on through the group's letter and the spokesperson. No source tests it, and the court decision described in c7 rests on the making and sharing of the video without the colleague's consent.

Reported On 9 July 2026 dpa reported, citing the Hannover public prosecutor's office, that the Wennigsen local court had fined a former employee of the parliamentary group 30 daily rates for a violation of the Kunsturhebergesetz, and that the decision is final because no objection was filed. The report describes the former employee as having made the video with a picture of the colleague without consent and shared it in a chat group.

Causal attribution. The outcome reaches the record only through a prosecutor statement relayed by dpa, and news.de and t-online carry the same text. The court decision was not read. The report does not say the court examined the AI method, and the daily-rate amount was not disclosed.

  • news.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Das Amtsgericht Wennigsen verhängte nach Angaben der Staatsanwaltschaft Hannover eine Geldstrafe von 30 Tagessätzen gegen einen früheren Mitarbeiter der Fraktion, der das Video mit Hilfe eines Bildes seiner Kollegin ohne deren Einwilligung erstellt und in einer Chatgruppe geteilt hatte.
  • news.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Geahndet wurde ein Verstoß gegen das Kunsturhebergesetz
  • news.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Einspruch habe der frühere CDU-Mitarbeiter nicht eingelegt, die Entscheidung sei damit rechtskräftig und das Verfahren abgeschlossen.
  • hannover.t-online.de(opens in new tab) supports · German
    Der Mann hatte das Bild einer Kollegin genutzt, um ohne ihr Wissen ein sexualisiertes KI-Video zu erstellen und es in einer Chatgruppe zu verbreiten.

Sources

5 sources inspected, from 3 underlying accounts. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

German original read by the reviewer without a human bilingual review. Locators are the German text. Welt article of 3 April 2026. Its paragraphs on the prosecutor come from a dpa inquiry (byline ends with dpa). Applies to s1.

German original read by the reviewer without a human bilingual review. Locators are the German text. dpa text of 1 April 2026 in Tagesspiegel. It cites Welt and Business Insider for the chat and dismissal facts and a Hannover public prosecutor spokesperson for the rest. Applies to s2.

German original read by the reviewer without a human bilingual review. Locators are the German text. Press release of the parliamentary group dated 1 April 2026, read through an Internet Archive capture of 18 June 2026 because the live page returned a bot wall. Applies to s3.

German original read by the reviewer without a human bilingual review. Locators are the German text. dpa text of 9 July 2026 on news.de. The report says NDR reported first, and the NDR article was not retrieved. Applies to s4.

German original read by the reviewer without a human bilingual review. Locators are the German text. t-online copy of the same dpa report of 9 July 2026. Applies to s5.

Event countries: Germany. Affected-person countries: Germany. Court countries: Germany.

Welt places the affair in the party group at the state parliament in Hannover, and the Hannover public prosecutor's office and the Wennigsen local court handled the matter. Lower Saxony is a German federal state. The colleague works in that parliamentary group. The country is taken from the place of the event and not from the language or the outlet.

Reviewed for publication 2026-09-30: Welt (3 April 2026), a dpa text in Tagesspiegel (1 April 2026), the parliamentary group's press release (1 April 2026) and dpa court-outcome reports (9 July 2026) describe one event. All claims are reported. The chain rests on Welt and Business Insider reporting, prosecutor statements passed on by dpa and the group's own release, so nothing is marked corroborated. The depicted colleague and the former employee are not named, no imagery detail is given, and no statement by the colleague was found. The event date is the reported posting date.

People reported harmed in this case

1 person

0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed

One depicted colleague (Welt: one further employee of the group. The prosecutor's statements, as relayed by dpa, refer to one colleague). The chat members and recipients are not counted as harmed, and no other depicted person is reported.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). Lower Saxony CDU parliamentary group employee reportedly posted an AI-generated sexualized video of a colleague in a private staff chat group. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-lower-saxony-cdu-group-employee-reported-ai-sexualized-video-of-colleague-in-staff-chat-group

BibTeX

@misc{2026_lower_saxony_cdu_group_employee_reported_ai_sexualized_video_of_colleague_in_staff_chat_group,
  title = {Lower Saxony CDU parliamentary group employee reportedly posted an AI-generated sexualized video of a colleague in a private staff chat group},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-lower-saxony-cdu-group-employee-reported-ai-sexualized-video-of-colleague-in-staff-chat-group}
}

Related cases

High Unidentified video tool

Northern Territory: a former NT Police assistant commissioner says an AI-generated sexually explicit video made from her official police photograph was circulated among serving officers; she learned of it in December 2025 and issued a statement after criminal proceedings against former colleagues concluded (ABC News, 24 September 2026)

Janelle Tonkin, a former assistant commissioner of the Northern Territory Police Force and now president of the Australasian Council of Women and Policing, said in a statement issued on 23 September 2026, after criminal proceedings on the matter were finalised, that in December 2025 she became aware that an AI-generated, sexually explicit video had been created using her official NT Police photograph; ABC News reports that the video was allegedly shared among serving members of the force and that she had taken former colleagues to court over it. She called the experience 'extremely distressing, personally and professionally' and said having her professional portrait 'turned into pornography and circulated among colleagues is something no person should have to experience'. The outcome of the court proceedings is not reported. An NT Police spokesperson said the force does not comment on internal investigations and was legally constrained from commenting on matters before the court, but that the conduct she was subjected to 'was, and always will be, totally unacceptable'; the NT Police Association condemned the conduct. Ms Tonkin said the video sat within a broader set of experiences in the force that she intends to describe later.

High Unidentified video tool

Campaigner reports panic and withdrawal from activism after sexual deepfake abuse

A campaigner described panic after discovering a sexual deepfake of herself in 2020. Reporting also describes threats and disclosure of her addresses. She temporarily stepped back from activism. The account attributes the effects to the combined harassment; the video’s individual contribution is unknown.

High Unidentified video tool

Indian journalist reports acute distress and a hospital visit after sexual deepfake abuse

An Indian journalist later reported acute distress and a hospital visit after a sexual deepfake of her circulated in April 2018. The generation tool and clinical records were not inspected.

Medium Unidentified video tool

Washington trooper alleges AI video was circulated as workplace harassment

A Washington State Patrol trooper's attorney told FOX 13 that coworkers circulated a deepfake AI video falsely depicting the trooper in an intimate interaction with another coworker. The attorney described the video as harassment based on sexual orientation. The agency said it valued employees' dignity and declined to comment on pending litigation. The video's first date, creator and circulation extent are unknown; earlier job and disciplinary allegations are separate.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents