It is considered the sharpest sword of democracy: Should a party ban procedure be initiated against the AfD or not? For the first time, lawyers, experts and celebrities discussed this question in a German parliament at a public hearing - of all places in Thuringia, where the AfD regional association with its leader Björn Höcke is considered particularly radical.
An entertainer, Hape Kerkeling, also had his say: He emphasized that he was not speaking as an expert in constitutional law, but as a descendant of a victim of National Socialism. “I feel that this democracy is in danger,” said Kerkeling, justifying his appearance in the state parliament. And he had a message: “Anyone who trivializes and refutes this country’s criminal past will forfeit any political right to exist in our democracy,” said Kerkeling. “In my opinion, their euphemistic attitude towards the Nazi dictatorship makes them unconstitutional.” The state's promise is: "We will not tolerate fascism in Germany," said Kerkeling.
Kerkeling's grandfather was a concentration camp prisoner in Buchenwald
In April, the entertainer gave a well-received speech at the commemoration of the liberation of the Nazi concentration camp Buchenwald near Weimar, to which his grandfather, like tens of thousands of other people, had been deported by the National Socialists. The Left faction invited him.
The reason for the hearing was a request from the Left parliamentary group. She wants to ensure that the state government supports a ban procedure at the federal level. After AfD election successes in Saxony-Anhalt, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin, the debate about a ban procedure has recently picked up speed again. What chances would a procedure have? What if it fails? The most important arguments of the hearing:
Dealing with Nazi history
Kerkeling limited his appearance to the AfD's handling of German history. “Fear, lies and hatred were the ingredients of the National Socialist ideology - and they are the same today for the direction of this right-wing extremist party,” said the comedian, author and actor. Anyone who relativizes, trivializes or trivializes the crimes of 1933 to 1945 is abandoning the foundation of the Basic Law. “Anyone who deliberately scares people - with disabilities, different beliefs, different skin colors, queer or transgender” violates their dignity, which is protected by the Basic Law.
The entertainer appealed to politicians to initiate proceedings to ban the AfD. Such a signal should come from Thuringia in particular. The defense of the Basic Law is not a question of left or right, government or opposition, Kerkeling told the MPs.
Intervention in democratic competition
The AfD sent one of its lawyers to the hearing: The lawyer and AfD lawyer Christian Conrad warned against party ban proceedings if there are uncertainties. “Initiating ban proceedings against a party that is not unconstitutional is itself unconstitutional,” he said. Before the hearing began, Conrad appeared at an AfD press conference. Conrad noted that the proposal is not legally binding on the government. “That means this is at best a political mandate,” he said. In the end, it is not about a review process, but about a party ban process, he emphasized. You go into battle.
Racist worldview
The lawyer Hendrik Cremer from the German Institute for Human Rights accused the AfD of having a racist and nationalist worldview. “The AfD aims to eliminate the basic democratic order,” he said. A party ban process has high hurdles, said Cremer. “In the case of the AfD, I see it as fulfilled.” Kathrin Groh from the University of the Bundeswehr said that the AfD was stirring up fear and desire for retaliation in society. Regarding the question of whether an application for a ban should be directed against the federal party or against individual state associations, she said that an isolated application against a state association could probably lead to a result more quickly.
Danger to the Federal Republic
Kirill-Alexander Schwarz, professor of public law at the University of Würzburg, was of the opinion that an important criterion for an AfD ban had been met - the threat to the existence of the Federal Republic. He justified this with demands from the AfD to leave the EU and at least parts of the party to leave NATO. The AfD also maintains close ties to dictatorial systems like the one in Russia. According to Schwarz, neither the size of the AfD nor the possible duration of the proceedings before the Federal Constitutional Court speak against a ban.
This could continue
Thuringia's Interior Minister Georg Maier was not among those to be heard, but made comments on the sidelines of the state parliament: "Majories in the Federal Council are currently sorting themselves in the direction of a possible application for an AfD ban," said the SPD politician. He expects the federal-state working group proposed by North Rhine-Westphalia's CDU Prime Minister Hendrik Wüst to examine the constitutional handling of the AfD to come into being this year. This was a first step. “We’ve never been this far.” Maier has long been one of the loudest supporters of a ban on the AfD.
