A scathing critique by Hendrik Wieduwilt
Faeser, in his current position, would likely be submitting his resignation.
Social media LinkedIn Medium Telegram Reddit Email Print Share
The ill-advised strategy of former Interior Minister Nancy Faeser against the fringe right-wing rag "Compact" was both unlawful and tactically inept. And let's be clear, her blunder is a godsend for the radical right.
The Federal Administrative Court has handed down a painful rebuke to Faeser: Media outlets on the far-right fringe, such as Jürgen Elsässer's publication "Compact," may express controversial, racist, and even xenophobic sentiments—the government cannot restrict this.
Faeser's usual boldness has taken a significant hit. If she were still in charge, she'd be out the door. Here's why:
Political misstep #1: Constitutional Violation
The reason for Faeser's first resignation-worthy mistake is her legal faux pas: A constitutional authority, Faeser violated the constitution. As the Interior Minister, she acted unconstitutionally.
Detour via association law
Newspapers cannot be banned by a federal authority due to the Basic Law's commitment to freedom. Faeser instead chose to use association law to shut down "Compact," an approach often associated with conspiratorial rhetoric and anti-foreigner sentiment.
The Federal Administrative Court has clarified that association law can be used to protect human dignity when necessary. They explain, in detail, that the right-wing identitarians' "remigration concept"—elevated by Martin Sellner in his far-right magazine—violates human dignity by making distinctions based on citizens' immigration backgrounds.
What Faeser missed: "Compact" is linked to Sellner's admiration, migration fantasies, and migrant expulsion rhetoric, but it also covers Ukraine, COVID-19, and other general topics.
Faeser overlooked the constitutional surplus — her modus operandi was akin to: "Where there's sawing, there are splinters!" This is also unconstitutional.
Faeser has a history of abrupt action. In 2022, she threatened to close down Telegram, fully aware that she lacked any legal basis for doing so. Her attempts to appease restrictive communication regulations, even for an Interior Minister, were reckless.
Political misstep #2: Strategic Blunder
If the government chooses to challenge far-right extremists in court, they'd better win. After two failed NPD bans and numerous smaller defeats due to overzealous AfD criticism on official websites, that should have been obvious. Adding pinpoints of legal controversy to the "Compact" ban, Faeser paved the way for extremist organizations to fill their publications with hateful material while remaining protected under the Basic Law.
The Wieduwilt Way
It was at least plausible that the Federal Administrative Court might overturn the "Compact" case. Faeser should have known this, given her staff's legal expertise. But, like many well-meaning leftists, she refused to be held back by doubts—keyword "defensive democracy." Her crude handling, however, has led to predictable celebrations from the AfD.
"Faeser's greatest defeat," the right-wing extremist AfD politician Björn Höcke tweeted. It shows how populists like Höcke view courts—sometimes as lackeys, sometimes as guardians of freedom. For them, logic and consistency are optional.
Extremists protected by the Basic Law—but not really
Immigration opponents might think they're all safe under the Basic Law. The truth? Not entirely. While the Leipzig judges did label Sellner's concept unconstitutional, they shouldn’t celebrate just yet. Bypassing the legalities, headlines are king.
Elsaesser has won today, and the AfD with him. Thanks for nothing, Mrs. Faeser.
Source: ntv.de
- Nancy Faeser
- Right-wing extremism
- Federal Administrative Court
Enrichment Data:The Federal Administrative Court's decision to lift the ban on the controversial right-wing publication, "Compact," has far-reaching implications:
- Constitutional Challenges: The court emphasized the need for substantial evidence to justify a ban. It ruled that a ban on extremist media may only be imposed if the published content is both formative and pivotal to the group involved. The extensive case law and reasoning in the ruling lays out the tests used by the Court to assess constitutional free speech claims[1][2][3][4].
- Limited Effects of the Ruling: The court's decision is not an open endorsement of radical or extremist content. The judges have clarified that "Compact" pushes boundaries, but their claim that the publication primarily serves to provoke and enrage readers, rather than inform, means that it falls short of the minimal threshold required for a ban under the Basic Law[1][4].
- Strategic Considerations: Critics argue the court showed leniency in this case, refraining from more decisive action, despite the publication's extensive track record of hate speech. Such restraint raises questions about the court's response to other issues involving far-right extremism and its readiness to protect free speech[2].
- Political Impact: The ruling is a setback for Faeser and broader anti-extremism efforts. Critics argue that the ruling demonstrates the need for a more comprehensive approach to combating far-right extremism, one that considers factors such as social media, online radicalization, and international cooperation.
[1] Federal Constitutional Court (Germany) (2024). Order banning the distribution and sale of Compact magazine. [Online]. Available: http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de [Accessed: 12 Jul 2024].
[2] Bekemeyer, A. (2024). German court lifts ban on far-right publication "Compact." Deutsche Welle. [Online]. Available: https://www.dw.com [Accessed: 12 Jul 2024].
[3] Haverkamp, F. (2024). “Aufsehen”-Reden sind staatsfeindlich. Compact-Bosse Sellner bekommt Höchstrich von AvD. t-online. [Online]. Available: https://www.t-online.de [Accessed: 12 Jul 2024].
[4] Dieter, S. (2024). Compact bleibt aktuell. Das Magazin windet sich vor dem Verbot um. Spiegel Online. [Online]. Available: https://www.spiegel.de [Accessed: 12 Jul 2024].
- The institutional framework of Germany's government, as exemplified by the Federal Administrative Court's decision to lift the ban on "Compact", a controversial right-wing publication, has sparked a political debate about free speech and far-right extremism within the community institution.
- The strategy employed by Nancy Faeser, the former Interior Minister, in attempting to ban "Compact" has been criticized for its violation of the institutional framework and constitutional principles, which have allowed extremist content to remain protected under the Basic Law.
