After the AfD's election success in Saxony-Anhalt, Hamburg's mayor Carola Veit (SPD) spoke out in favor of a closer examination of a possible ban procedure. It is time to advance the debate about the prerequisites for such a step, said Germany's longest-serving parliamentary speaker at the Hamburg state press conference.
Veit appeared open to a federal-state working group that could gather material and legal basis for a possible ban procedure against the AfD. So far in the discussion, constitutional lawyers in particular have warned about the risks of such a procedure. However, politicians from various parties are now calling for an audit. “If you ask me personally, then I also think that now is the time to be more specific,” said Veit. If there is a nationwide discussion about whether the conditions for an AfD ban are met, “then delaying it will no longer help.”
Veit does not see the fact that the AfD received more than 40 percent of the vote in Saxony-Anhalt as an argument against a ban. Whether a party can be banned does not depend on its number of voters, but on the legal requirements. “Even 40 percent doesn’t change the fact that the party has to be banned if we have the conditions for it.”
Veit did not stop at the debate about a possible ban. She also spoke in detail about how the democratic parties can regain lost trust. Veit referred to Hamburg's clubs, associations, citizens' initiatives and volunteers. They are an important reason why politics can still be experienced directly in many places in the city. Democracy does not only consist of the Senate and the citizens, but also of the many people who are involved in district assemblies, clubs or initiatives.
At the same time, the mayor described the difficulties in communicating parliamentary work in a comprehensible manner. At the last town hall meeting there were 150 agenda items on the agenda. Members of Parliament are expected to be able to provide information on all of these topics. At the same time, the public should be able to understand what citizens decide on and why decisions are made. Given the speed of news, social networks and digital communication, this is becoming increasingly difficult.
Veit was particularly clear about how the democratic parties treat each other. To the thesis that the SPD, CDU and other parties are attacking each other harder and more personally than before and that the AfD is benefiting from this, she replied: “I am with you 100 percent.”
Political disputes are increasingly being conducted via short videos, Instagram Reels, pointed messages and personal attacks, said Veit. As a result, citizens would primarily see conflicts and mutual belittlement. “Some of what the citizens see is really a bit blurred,” she said. Democratic parties would be doing themselves a disservice “if we just constantly talk badly about each other.”
Criticism and tough debates were of course part of parliamentarism. From their point of view, it becomes problematic where political opponents are mainly attacked personally and political disputes only work if they come to a head. Politicians should therefore also ask themselves what impression they themselves convey of politics.
In this context, Veit defended her own statements about the election results in Saxony-Anhalt. She responded cautiously but firmly to criticism that a speaker of parliament should not comment on election results. If a party that is classified as right-wing extremist in several countries achieves great electoral success and Hamburg AfD politicians support the political course of these regional associations, they cannot remain silent about it. “It’s my duty as Parliament Speaker to say something,” said Veit.
