(de-news.net) – Following the reclassification of the AfD as unequivocally right‐extremist by the domestic intelligence agency, the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, the debate regarding the handling of the party accelerated markedly. The Federal Minister of Justice, Volker Wissing, was reported to have endorsed the intelligence service’s assessment while cautioning against any collaboration with the AfD by democratic parties. He maintained that, although the party retained the right to challenge the classification legally, its normalization through political cooperation would be irresponsible given that the constitutional framework guarantees equal rights for all citizens.
In parallel, divergent opinions emerged among political actors. The candidate for the position as chairman of the FDP, Christian Dürr, opined that a ban would convey a damaging message to voters and recalled that previous attempts to ban similar extremist parties had failed; he suggested that the AfD should instead be politically diminished by addressing concrete societal issues.
The domestic policy spokesperson of the Union faction, Alexander Throm (CDU), indicated that, in light of the new assessment by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, a detailed analysis of the implications for handling the AfD was imperative. He maintained that political engagement with the party must continue, while emphasizing that the new coalition should secure rapid, tangible achievements in areas such as migration, security, and the economy. Similarly, the legal policy spokesperson for the Union faction in the Bundestag, Günter Krings (CDU), was noted as having remarked that the security service’s decision was hardly surprising given the AfD’s ongoing radicalization. However, he expressed reservations regarding the initiation of a ban procedure before the Federal Constitutional Court, contending that there was no automatic process and that such a move might further enable the AfD to cultivate an image of victimization.
Concurrently, Berlin Justice Senator Badenberg explained that any discussion of a party ban should await a judicial ruling, especially in light of the AfD’s intended legal challenge against its classification as unequivocally right‐extremist. She stressed that the party could not be treated like any typical political organization.
In contrast, the executive board of the Christian Democratic Workers’ Association of Germany (CDA), the labor wing of the CDU, asserted that the intelligence service had conclusively confirmed that the AfD functioned as an anti-constitutional entity intent on undermining democracy and dividing society. This representative argued that the resulting evidence provided the necessary foundation for an immediate ban procedure and further recommended withdrawing state funding from the party, given its effective exploitation of digital disinformation.
Meanwhile, the SPD’s Reem Alabali-Radovan was noted as advocating for decisive measures, arguing that the publication of a comprehensive expert report provided overwhelming evidence to necessitate the initiation of a ban procedure aimed at protecting democratic coexistence. Helge Lindh (SPD), on his part, urged his parliamentary faction to revive the discussion concerning the initiation of a ban procedure against the AfD. He maintained that, in view of the party’s recent classification as a secured right‐extremist entity by the domestic intelligence service, proposals—whether originating from coalition groups or broader parliamentary initiatives—should be examined carefully. Lindh suggested that both the federal government and the Bundesrat ought to engage with the matter, emphasizing that there was a constitutional mandate to explore all avenues for a prohibition process once the requisite conditions were met.
Similarly, Marco Wanderwitz (CDU), a co-initiator of the proposed ban, was noted for asserting that the recently published evidence—extending to over a thousand pages—had created a new context for the debate. He argued that a ban on the AfD would be the most efficacious means to rally support for centrist parties, contending that as long as the AfD existed, attracting its broad voter base, including moderates, to alternative democratic parties would remain an insurmountable challenge.
In North Rhine-Westphalia, political figures from various parties similarly called for a tougher stance. Leaders from the Greens, SPD, and CDU stressed that decisive legal action was now imperative to safeguard democracy, with one spokesperson even remarking that those who systematically undermined human dignity and the rule of law should no longer be allowed to operate under the guise of conventional politics. It was further noted that proposals for a party ban could be submitted by the federal government, the Bundestag, or the Bundesrat, with the final decision resting with the Federal Constitutional Court.
