Thuringian parliament holds Germany's first hearing on banning the AfD

First parliamentary hearing on an AfD ban

On Wednesday evening, 30 September 2026, the Judiciary Committee of the Thuringian state parliament in Erfurt held the first public hearing in a German parliament regarding a potential ban of the Alternative for Germany (AfD). The session, which ran until midnight, examined legal requirements and political arguments surrounding a constitutional prohibition. The initiative originated from a motion introduced by the Left party (Die Linke), urging the Thuringian state government to push for a formal ban petition in the Bundesrat. Eight legal scholars and experts presented testimony during the proceedings, alongside guest speakers invited by parliamentary groups.

Testimony on historical parallels

German entertainer and author Hape Kerkeling appeared before the committee on the invitation of Die Linke, speaking as a descendant of a victim of National Socialism rather than a legal expert. Kerkeling pointed to the proximity of the Buchenwald concentration camp and recalled that the NSDAP first entered government in Thuringia in 1930, three years before taking national power. He argued that downplaying Nazi crimes violates the basic constitutional order.

“A party that draws its existence from stoking hatred against minorities has no place in our country with its dreadful history. Whoever relativises, trivialises, or plays down the crimes from 1933 to 1945 abandons the ground of the Basic Law.”

Kerkeling urged lawmakers to use their influence in the Bundesrat, warning that delaying action would only allow the party to become more radicalized over time.

Legal evidence and party defence

Legal experts presented extensive documentation during the hearing. Valentina Chiofalo, co-author of a study by the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte, detailed a report containing 2,500 documented examples of unconstitutional statements and plans by AfD figures, citing proposals to imprison opposing politicians and restrict civic rights based on origin. Legal scholar Hendrik Cremer argued that the party operates in the tradition of National Socialism and warned that waiting too long could prevent effective democratic defence. Lawyer Chan-Jo Jun confronted the AfD faction over its use of the term remigration, stating that while the official platform refers to individuals without residency rights, party members routinely apply it to millions of residents without party leadership rejecting those interpretations.

“This is not a legal question, but a political choice to damage a party.”

AfD lawyer Christian Conrad rejected the accusations during the session, describing the hearing as a political campaign aimed at delegitimizing an opposition party.

Procedural pathways in federal politics

Under the German Basic Law, only the Bundestag, the Bundesrat, or the Federal Government can formally submit a party ban application to the Federal Constitutional Court. The Thuringian intelligence service has classified the state chapter of the AfD as proven right-wing extremist for five years. While left-leaning parties and the Social Democrats support initiating proceedings, discussions are also expanding within Chancellor Friedrich Merz's Christian Democratic Union (CDU/CSU), where figures such as North Rhine-Westphalia Premier Hendrik Wüst have advocated evaluating the legal prospects of an application. Former Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution president Hans-Georg Maaßen also participated in the Erfurt proceedings as an invited contributor.