Classification as a suspected case: Flood of applications delays AfD process

The legal proceedings surrounding the classification of the AfD as a suspected right-wing extremist case continue. Contrary to previous expectations, the verdict is a long time coming – also because various procedural applications slowed down the decision-making process.

The Higher Administrative Court (OVG) in Münster had scheduled two days for oral hearings on the suspected AfD case. Normally this should be enough time for an administrative court hearing – even if it is a so-called major case. After all, the parties to the legal dispute had already exchanged their positions in writing before the hearing.

At least that is probably what the OVG planned. A verdict could then be given quickly after the end of the oral hearing, perhaps even on the same day, as was heard in the run-up to the hearing. But this second day of negotiations ended with an adjournment to a later date. To continue the negotiation, mind you. Not for sentencing. It just took longer overall.

Numerous applications

The lawyers of the plaintiff, which the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution considers to be right-wing extremist enough to observe it using intelligence means, made extensive use of the procedural options granted to them by the law. They submit requests for evidence, requests for bias and requests for exclusion of the public.

The hearing was therefore regularly interrupted so that the Senate could discuss these applications. A court cannot ignore such applications unless it wants to provide starting points for a possible appeal. The Senate chairman said at times that he did not want to restrict the party’s procedural rights. And so it just took a little longer.

Actual evidence?

The big question in the proceedings is: Does the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution have enough factual evidence to justify classifying the AfD as a suspected right-wing extremist case?

It was only in the afternoon of the second day of the trial that the content of the proceedings came closer to this important aspect. At the center: the “ethnically understood folk concept”. According to the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the view is widespread in large parts of the AfD that people with a migration background cannot become “real” Germans. Even after obtaining German citizenship, as “passport Germans” they remained only second-class citizens.

In general, the AfD distinguishes between “German people” and “state people”. This emerges, among other things, from statements by Björn Höcke and Alexander Gauland. Personnel from the top management level of the party.

AfD denies allegations

Who in the AfD should understand that was the counter-argument from Roman Reusch (AfD). At this stage he took the floor and explained: The AfD members are largely “simple people” who can’t do anything with such “hair-splitting”. In addition, there are “stacks” of migrants in the party who could in turn confirm that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is wrong.

To prove this, the AfD presented three party members with a migration background. They were given the opportunity to comment shortly before the end of the trial day. Whether that is enough for the OVG to shake the evidence presented by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a question of this procedure.

New date not yet determined

There are several thousand pieces of evidence that were presented to the court – in film and written form. How the court feels about this will only become clear when the hearing continues. The OVG has not yet given a fixed date for this, but it will be determined soon.

Because the AfD’s lawsuit has no suspensive effect, the status quo remains for now: the AfD’s classification as a suspected case, as confirmed by the Cologne Administrative Court, remains in effect.