The far-right party AfD in Thuringia prohibits all media personnel from attending their elections celebration.
Initially, the AfD in Thuringia aimed to exclude certain journalists from their election party. However, a court ruling against this exclusion led the party to change its tactic, deciding to ban all media representatives from attending the event for the upcoming Sunday's state election. Deputy spokesperson of the AfD state association, Torben Braga, confirmed this on Friday evening following the Regional Court of Erfurt's decision, as previously reported by MDR. Instead, journalists can interview AfD party and faction representatives in the Thuringian state parliament on Sunday evening, as reported by the broadcaster.
Originally, the Regional Court of Erfurt ordered the AfD to allow several journalists who had been initially refused access to their election party for the Thuringia election. The court upheld the freedom of the press facing potential risks, with media outlets like "Der Spiegel", Springer's "Bild" and "Welt", and the daily newspaper "taz" collectively challenging the AfD's exclusion of their journalists from the party. The verdict was not yet legally binding, as the AfD still had the option to appeal to the Higher Regional Court.
Traditional election party gatherings on election day are significant meeting spots for journalists, as they capture the general mood regarding election results, provide interviews, and often host prominent party representatives. Thuringians vote for a new state parliament on Sunday with top AfD candidate Björn Höcke. Recent polls place the party in first place with values around 30 percent, and the state office for the protection of the constitution classifies the Thuringian AfD as a securely right-wing extremist.
The judge's reasoning for the ruling
Presiding judge Christoph von Friesen justified the ruling by stating that the election party did not hold the character of a thank-you event for election helpers and party friends but rather an "informative role". Since the AfD had already granted access to other media representatives, the party must also accommodate other media representatives. Although space limitations do not allow for an unlimited claim, the party should have transparently shared a specific accreditation procedure for a fair selection of media representatives, the judge further explained.
Braga explained for the AfD that approximately 150 media representatives had registered for the election party by Saturday morning. However, the capacity at the previously secret location only allowed a total of 200 participants, with 50 media representatives already receiving confirmation.
Reasons for the oral hearing
The Regional Court conducted an oral hearing because the AfD had challenged an identical urgent order from the court the previous week. In the meantime, the Constitutional Court of Thuringia suggested that the party should have been given a legal hearing before the urgent order. This has now occurred, and the court made a decision before the election party.
In a second case, the Regional Court ruled that another plaintiff journalist had the right to attend the election party. Previously, the Constitutional Court had reprimanded the Regional Court for granting the AfD a deadline for a statement until September 2nd, i.e., after the election day. The decision was made in time for the election party, as has now happened.
Despite the court's ruling mandating the AfD to allow certain journalists to their 'Elections to the Landtag of Thuringia' event, the party opted to ban all media representatives. This decision was a change from their initial plan to exclude certain journalists.
Following the court's decision, journalists no longer have access to the AfD's election party, but they can interview party representatives in the Thuringian state parliament on Sunday evening.
