"Legality of 'Compact' Maintained"
Uncensored, Unfiltered, Unleashed: A Fresh Look at Compact's 'Victory'
The Elsässer household is buzzing with celebration this week, thanks to the Federal Administrative Court's latest decision. "Compact," the controversial magazine co-founded by Jürgen Elsässer, will no longer face an impending ban, and the gang's all set to cash in on this 'victory' over the federal government. With merchandise like T-shirts boasting "Government Defeater," silver coins bearing the likeness of Elsässer and his wife, budding bathrobes (a cheeky homage to the 2023 police encounter), and affordable subscriptions on offer, the team at Compact is surely eager to expand their empire.
But the road to this victory wasn't an easy one. In mid-2024, then-Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser, of the SPD, banned "Compact" under association law, citing their activities as far more than mere media production. The Interior Ministry argued that "Compact" was planning a coup, aligned with the extreme right, and spreading anti-constitutional content.
However, the judges at the Federal Administrative Court had a very different view. While they agreed that "Compact" undeniably promotes anti-constitutional content — specifically pointing out Martin Sellner and his "Remigration" concept — they refused to uphold the partial ban. Presiding Judge Ingo Kraft clarified that "Compact" identifies with the Austrian identitarian's concept and that statements like "our hero" speak volumes. The court also noted that the press spokesman of the far-right party "Die Heimat" (formerly NPD) being an employee of "Compact" is a clear sign of the magazine's racist ethos.
However, the court found that although the magazine's statements were extreme, they could be interpreted as "exaggerated, but ultimately permissible criticism of migration policy" under the light of communication fundamental rights. The judges also stated that demands for stricter naturalization requirements and higher integration demands are "not per se incompatible with human dignity and the principle of democracy."
Looking Ahead: Balancing Freedoms
This ruling has garnered mixed responses. Journalist organizations like Reporters Without Borders (RSF) welcome the decision, arguing that the ban by a political authority like the Federal Ministry of the Interior would infringe on press freedom, potentially causing significant harm to democracy.
In a statement, RSF's Executive Director, Anja Osterhaus, said, "The Federal Administrative Court's ruling confirms: In a democracy, constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights must be taken into account — even when it's difficult to accept in the face of extremist and racist content from a medium."
However, critics argue that the court prioritized freedom of expression over the danger posed by the magazine's extremist viewpoints. The controversy remains, and we'll have to wait and see how "Compact" navigates this newfound freedom amid growing opposition.
Want to stay on top of the week's most important topics? Sign up for our weekly newsletter "nd.DieWoche" to read the highlights of our Saturday edition already on Friday. Get the free subscription here.
Compact @ a Glance
Compact is a far-right German magazine that unites various right-wing political milieus through strategic topics. The magazine has been associated with antisemitic and anti-Israel content and has close ties with the far-right party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), which the German government classified as extremist in May 2024. Following the temporary suspension and subsequent lifting of the ban, Compact resumed publication and distribution legally in Germany. The decision was controversial, with critics labelling Compact a main mouthpiece for right-wing extremism.
The Elsässer household is now looking to expand their empire with merchandise related to their magazine 'Compact', offering items like T-shirts and subscriptions.
Despite promoting anti-constitutional content, the Federal Administrative Court's ruling allowed 'Compact' to resume publication, sparking debates on the balance between freedom of expression and potential dangers posed by extremist viewpoints.
