The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution can classify the AfD and its youth organization Junge Alternative (JA) as suspected right-wing extremist cases. The North Rhine-Westphalian Higher Administrative Court (OVG) in Münster came to this judgment on Monday, confirming an earlier judgment by the Cologne Administrative Court. This means that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution can continue to monitor the party using intelligence means.
The court explained that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution had maintained proportionality in its measures. The procedure is compatible with the Basic Law, European law and international law. The powers of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution are “by no means limitless,” but a well-defensed democracy should not be a “toothless tiger,” emphasized Gerald Buck, presiding judge of the 5th Senate, in the justification for the decision.
Particularly when monitoring a particularly protected political party, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution must be able to present “sufficiently conclusive circumstances” that indicate that a group may be pursuing efforts against the free basic order. The Senate saw this as the case when the AfD was classified as a suspected right-wing extremist case. The Senate is convinced that there is a well-founded suspicion “that it corresponds to the political objectives of at least a significant part of the AfD to only grant German citizens with a migration background a legally devalued status,” it said in the justification. According to the Basic Law, this is “inadmissible discrimination”.
In the appeal process, the AfD had defended itself against the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution listing the entire party, the now disbanded AfD wing and the youth organization Junge Alternative as suspected extremist cases. The wing is also concerned with the classification as a confirmed extremist effort. In the first instance, the Cologne Administrative Court ruled in favor of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution: the judges saw sufficient evidence of anti-constitutional efforts within the AfD. The OVG now agreed with this.
At the beginning of the hearing at the OVG in Münster in mid-March, the AfD submitted numerous applications for bias against the judges. A lawyer for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution accused the AfD of wanting to drag out the process.
Faeser welcomes the verdict
Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD) welcomed the ruling by the Münster Higher Administrative Court. “Today’s verdict shows that we are a well-fortified democracy,” she said in Berlin. The constitutional state has instruments to protect democracy from threats from within. Exactly these have now been confirmed by an independent court, says Faeser.
The verdict is not yet legally binding. The OVG did not allow an appeal. However, the AfD can lodge a complaint with the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig. The party’s lawyers had already announced in advance that they wanted to do this. In a possible appeal, the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig would examine the OVG’s decision for legal errors. However, since the court in Münster is the final authority on facts, the AfD could no longer submit any new applications for evidence before the Federal Administrative Court.