Legal experts clash over potential AfD ban in Thuringian parliament hearing

Legal committee convenes in Erfurt

The Justice Committee of the Thuringian State Parliament in Erfurt held an expert hearing on Wednesday regarding a motion to initiate a ban procedure against Alternative for Germany (AfD). The motion, submitted by the parliamentary group of Die Linke, asks the Thuringian state government to advocate for a federal ban process before the Federal Constitutional Court, including via the Bundesrat. Legal scholars, constitutional experts, and party counsel delivered contrasting evaluations regarding the legal thresholds and procedural risks of such an action. The committee hearing also scheduled late-evening testimony from former domestic intelligence president Hans-Georg Maaßen and entertainer Hape Kerkeling.

Legal arguments on party evolution and extremism

Würzburg attorney Chan-jo Jun argued before the committee that a legal procedure before the Federal Constitutional Court would not represent a failure even if it concluded without a ban. Jun estimated that a constitutional case could take up to three years, during which the party would be compelled to evolve. He explained that this timeframe would force the AfD to either openly embrace radical elements or formally distance itself from positions hostile to the constitution. Jun stated that superficial linguistic moderation would not satisfy constitutional scrutiny. He asserted that the party must ensure that concepts such as the large-scale expulsion of citizens, promoted under the label of remigration by figures like right-wing extremist Martin Sellner, are not treated as party policy by its base. Jun noted that party supporters serve as a direct reflection of the organisation, while expressing personal hope that internal members who privately disavow extreme positions will openly reject them. Hendrik Cremer of the German Institute for Human Rights also addressed lawmakers, stating that the AfD maintains a racist worldview intended to eliminate the basic democratic order.

Defense challenges constitutional basis

AfD legal representative Christian Conrad, who has represented the party in legal disputes against the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution since 2018, argued against launching proceedings. Speaking at the invitation of the Thuringian AfD faction following a morning press conference, Conrad stated that an unconstitutional status must be proven for the federal party in its entirety, rather than through selected statements, individuals, or state chapters.

Initiating a ban procedure against a party that is not unconstitutional is itself unconstitutional. Because you then directly intervene in democratic competition.

Conrad explained that the motion introduced by Die Linke creates only a non-binding political recommendation rather than a legal requirement for the state government. He contended that subjecting a party to a ban process imposes an immediate political disadvantage during ongoing democratic elections. Conrad argued that the process is not an exploratory investigation but an adversarial legal action that harms democratic competition if launched without definitive proof of unconstitutionality.