For the Federal Constitutional Court it is clear: the NPD is anti-constitutional. Therefore, the successor party “Die Heimat” can have its state funding withdrawn. Can this be transferred to the AfD?
As expected, the Federal Constitutional Court has excluded the NPD, which now calls itself “Die Heimat”, from state funding for six years, as the rules stipulate. It thus approved the request from the Bundestag, Bundesrat and Federal Government.
The judges of the second Senate are checking again whether the party’s leadership level is not riddled with informants from the state. But they were convinced that the state had learned from the first ban proceedings against the NPD in 2003, when this turned out to be a big problem. According to the documents presented, it can now be assumed that the party is not secretly controlled by state undercover investigators.
No problems with that principle of democracy
The court also sees no problems with the principle of democracy. In this process, the party criticized the fact that it would violate equal opportunities if, unlike other parties, it no longer received subsidies from the state.
But the party wants to abolish the free democratic basic order, said the vice president of the court, Doris König. “The requirement of democracy only includes the principle of equal opportunities for political parties to the extent that they, for their part, recognize and respect the fundamental democratic principles.”
Anti-constitutionality explicitly stated
The main part of the 129-page judgment is the examination of whether the respondent in the proceedings, i.e. “Die Heimat” alias NPD, is still unconstitutional. In 2017, the judges rejected a ban on the NPD because it was not powerful enough. But the unconstitutionality was explicitly stated at the time.
“This continues to apply unchanged,” said König. “The respondent continues to disregard the free democratic basic order and, according to its goals and the behavior of its members and supporters, is aimed at its elimination.”
Essentially related to that National Socialism
The party would still adhere to the ethnic concept of the people and the idea of the German national community. This would violate human dignity and the principle of fundamental equality under the law. Foreigners, migrants and minorities are disrespected.
“The evidence now presented shows that the respondent’s racist, especially anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic and anti-Gypsy attitude, as well as her negative attitude towards social minorities such as transsexual people, continues unchanged,” said König.
Furthermore, according to the evidence presented, the party is still essentially related to National Socialism. “In addition, it despises the existing parliamentary system and calls for it to be overcome,” said König.
Extensive evidence is necessary
This ruling makes it clear: Even if a party is not to be banned, but only to have state finances withdrawn, it must still be fully examined whether it is unconstitutional.
Anyone thinking about whether such proceedings should also be initiated against the AfD now knows that extensive evidence will be necessary in any case.
Whether such a procedure in Karlsruhe would lead to the AfD no longer receiving reimbursement of campaign costs and having to pay full tax on inheritances, for example, can possibly be seen in another court case: At the end of February, the Münster Higher Administrative Court wants to hear the question of whether the AfD should be considered a Suspected cases may be observed by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.
This will show how much evidence there is currently that incriminates the party. The first instance, the Cologne Administrative Court, found in March 2022 that there was sufficient factual evidence of anti-constitutional efforts by the AfD that were directed against the free, democratic basic order.
Not so easy with the AfD
The extreme currents in the party have now become stronger. Theoretically, it should now be easier for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to substantiate its legal opinion.
For proceedings at the Federal Constitutional Court, this evidence would have to be comparable to what the Constitutional Court examined in the current ruling on the NPD / “Die Heimat”. After that, it doesn’t just depend on the respective party program or speeches by the party leadership. Statements made by members can also be decisive if they have to be attributed to the party.
With some certainty, however, assessing the evidence for the AfD would not be as easy as for the NPD. This is still strongly based on National Socialist ideas and there is much to be seen in its party program that, in the view of the Constitutional Court, clearly violates human dignity.
Gigi Deppe, SWR, tagesschau, January 23, 2024 11:59 a.m