The AfD experiences an increased categorization.

The AfD confronts a more significant classification.

The AfD, according to the Münster Higher Administrative Court, violates the German constitution's guarantee of human dignity and displays "indications of anti-democratic aspirations." The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution can now classify the party as a right-wing extremist "suspected case" and potentially take it further.

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution obtained yet another legal victory over the AfD: The court authorizes its classification of the AfD as a right-wing extremist "suspected case." The party plans to appeal to the next level. Additionally, it faces the possibility of being classified as a "confirmed right-wing extremist movement."

The Office for the Protection of the Constitution's President, Thomas Haldenwang, addressed the press just over two hours after the judgment was announced in Cologne, stating that the court had "completely confirmed" the agency's assessment. Haldenwang did not disclose whether his organization intends to classify the AfD as an extremist in general. This would be evaluated "very freely."

The AfD lost its appeals in Münster on three separate fronts. "Junge Alternative," the AfD youth organization, and the "wing" around right-wing extremist Björn Höcke were both correctly labeled as suspected cases by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution by the court's conclusion. These legal proceedings had no relation to the ongoing proceedings against Höcke in the Regional Court in Halle. Tomorrow, a verdict is anticipated there.

In addition, the OVG Münster approved the grouping of the "Wing" as a "verified extremist movement" - the highest level employed by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to categorize anti-constitutional organizations. Prior to the suspected case, the lowest classification is the so-called test case.

In terms of timing, the ruling lags behind the advancements of the AfD's affiliated groups and the "wing": the "Junge Alternative" is now also categorized by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution as a "confirmed extremist movement." Despite the fact that the "Wing" is the most influential faction within the AfD, it has officially been disbanded.

Discrimination founded on origin

"The constitutional siren is screeching," stated presiding judge Gerald Buck in his decision. "Is this a fire or merely smoke?" It is the Office for the Protection of the Constitution's duty to discern this. The court ruled there was reasonable grounds to believe "that it corresponds to the political objectives of at least a significant part of the AfD to only grant full rights to native Germans and deny German nationals with a migration background equal status." According to the Basic Law, this constitutes "unlawful discrimination on the basis of origin, which contradicts the guarantee of human dignity."

Behind this is the essentially racist division between "true Germans" and "passport Germans," as neo-Nazis and right-wing extremists call it. The AfD attempted to dispel this accusation in 2021 with a "Declaration on the German Nation and German Identity." It asserts the party is "unequivocally committed to the German nation as the sum of all individuals who hold German citizenship." Höcke's name was also part of the document at the time.

"Indications of anti-democratic aspirations"

However, this declaration had no effect. In its notification, the Münster Higher Administrative Court highlighted that it had received "a large quantity of statements targeting migrants." These remarks "uniformly denigrate them regardless of the degree of their integration into German society and question their full membership in the German people despite their German citizenship."

This referred to statements like the one made by Höcke in 2018, when he stated that "regrettably, we will lose some sections of the population who are either too weak or unwilling to resist the ongoing Africanization, Orientalization, and Islamization." Attorney Hendrik Cremer depicts this as "the thinly veiled announcement of lethal violence in the service of a völkisch worldview."

Nonetheless, the court did not completely agree with the Office for the Protection of the Constitution's evaluations: In the case of the AfD, the judges spotted "indications of anti-democratic tendencies," but not at the "frequency and density" assumed by the Federal Office.

Haldenwang wants to "assess with an extremely open mind."

If a group is labeled as a suspected case, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution may use intelligence service resources to observe it, including surveillance or undercover agents. The requirements for using such methods are somewhat less stringent if a group is categorized as a confirmed extremist.

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is weighing whether or not to implement the third stage against the political party as a whole, as it has done with the youth group and the "faction." In an interview, President of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Haldenwang, mentioned that they would decide through an "open-ended assessment" but didn't provide a timeline. Educating us that the Federal Office regularly evaluates suspicious cases, Haldenwang also highlighted the AfD's questioning of human dignity for many members of the society.

To date, only the AfD state associations in Thuringia, Saxony-Anhalt, and Saxony have received an official right-wing extremist label from the respective state constitutional protection agencies. Despite this, the AfD has hinted at taking legal action against any potential classification as an "extremist" party. In response to the recent ruling that classified the party as a "suspected case" by the Administrative Court of Münster, the AfD vowed to present their case before the Federal Administrative Court.

While the legal implications still remain unclear, the current situation could negatively impact the AfD in upcoming elections. As the party often projects itself as a victim of persecution, being labeled as anti-constitutional may not go down well. To avoid this, they had set up a "Working Group for the Protection of the Constitution" in 2018 to strategize ways to dodge such a label. However, the group's head, Roland Hartwig, was subsequently dismissed due to a disagreement with a fellow party member, right-wing extremist Andreas Kalbitz.

Right-wing extremism expert Axel Salheiser raised concerns that the Münster ruling could potentially tarnish the AfD's image. According to him, the AfD's downward trend in popularity could be further exacerbated by this decision. Salheiser pointed out that even though there might be distrust towards the established parties, governments, and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, courts generally enjoy a high level of confidence among the German public - even among those who may not have issues with the AfD currently.

Moreover, Axel Salheiser emphasized that extremist parties cannot be seen as a suitable partner in discussions or cooperation, given their anti-democratic nature. He stressed the importance of remaining steadfast against these types of threats: "There cannot be neutrality when dealing with nationalist-racist enemies of the constitution. This applies to state administration, public institutions, culture, education, and business." If the ruling is confirmed by the courts, the consequences could include AfD members facing disciplinary action, along with a potential cutoff of their state party funding and the possibility of a ban on the AfD.

Read also:

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution considered Björn Höcke's faction within the AfD as a "verified extremist movement," the highest level of classification for anti-constitutional organizations. Despite this, Höcke is currently facing trials in the Regional Court in Halle.

In the court's decision, it was stated that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the political objectives of at least a significant part of the AfD involve only granting full rights to native Germans and denying equal status to German nationals with a migration background, which is unlawful discrimination on the basis of origin and contradicts the guarantee of human dignity.

Source: www.ntv.de