The Bundestag is gearing up for a heated debate on Thursday over whether to initiate legal proceedings to ban the Alternative for Germany (AfD). Lawmakers have officially placed the proposal on the parliamentary agenda, with discussions expected to kick off around 5:30 p.m.
At the heart of this controversy is a petition backed by 113 MPs, pushing for the Federal Constitutional Court to rule on whether AfD violates Germany’s democratic principles. Supporters of the motion also want federal and state governments to take steps toward establishing the party’s alleged threat to constitutional order—this includes shutting down intelligence informants within the party, known as V-men.
“The AfD opposes central basic principles of the free democratic basic order,” the proposal states. According to the document, the party allegedly undermines human dignity and promotes a nationalist vision of German identity.
The motion cites various legal rulings, intelligence reports, and investigative journalism to back its claims. It also highlights the “Potsdam Conference” from late 2023, where discussions reportedly took place about mass deportations—falsely stating that which exceed any existing legal framework for repatriation policies.
Even if the Constitutional Court decides against an outright ban, the motion’s backers still aim to strip AfD of state funding by officially declaring it unconstitutional. Interestingly, at a recent party congress in Riesa, AfD moved to establish a new youth wing, further escalating tensions with its opponents.
Not everyone is on board with an immediate ban. A separate proposal, led by 43 members of the Green Party, takes a more cautious approach. While these MPs acknowledge “significant signs” of AfD’s unconstitutionality, they advocate for an expert review before taking the matter to the courts.
Their reasoning? Party bans face extremely high legal hurdles. Even if Germany’s intelligence agency upgrades AfD from a “suspected extremist entity” to a “confirmed far-right movement,” that alone wouldn’t guarantee the stringent legal requirements for prohibition.
Union party MPs have also thrown their voices into the mix, drawing comparisons to past party bans, such as the one against the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD). However, they argue that AfD is more sophisticated in its rhetoric, often using “carefully crafted language” to obscure its true intentions.
One of the most vocal proponents of the ban, Marco Wanderwitz (CDU), is spearheading the push. With his departure from the Bundestag looming, he’s doubling down on efforts to see AfD banned. Other prominent supporters include Anton Hofreiter, Ricarda Lang, Claudia Roth (Greens), Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU), and Ralf Stegner (SPD). Notably absent from this movement? Lawmakers from BSW and FDP.
AfD leader Alice Weidel isn’t mincing words. Back in October, she blasted the idea of banning her party, calling it “a desperate and undemocratic move by political opponents.” She remains confident that the motion won’t even survive the Bundestag vote.
Even within rival parties, some politicians express unease at the notion of excluding a party that holds 20% of the electorate’s support. The debate raises a fundamental question: can a democracy justify banning a party that millions of citizens have chosen to represent them?
