Safeguarding the Rights of Conservative Radicalists as Per Constitutional Guidelines
Grab a Beer, This is Juicy! (Facebook | Twitter | Whatsapp | E-Mail | Print | Copy Link)
Last week's headlines buzzed about the House of Cards-like legal fuss between the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). Here's the lowdown.
The BfV, arguably the German spy agency, decided to lay off the public labels until a court decision on an urgent procedure. They did this by giving a so-called "standstill undertaking," a fancy legal term for promises not to disturb the status quo. A spokesperson from the Cologne Administrative Court confirmed the receipt of this intriguing letter. Unfortunately, the BfV declined to spill the beans, citing the ongoing nature of the proceedings and the need for judicial respect.
In the past, the BfV has issued such undertakings, like in Jan 2021, after the AfD took umbrage at its designation as a "suspicious case." The lawsuit for the party wasn't a walk in the park, losing in two rounds. The decision of the Higher Administrative Court in Münster isn't set in stone yet.
The AfD's Defiant Response
On a Friday of an eventful year, the BfV finally put out its updated evaluation of the AfD. After an exhaustive review, they slapped the party with a new label: "confirmed right-wing extremist." They explained their decision by pointing out a "disregard for human dignity, with an extremist bent affecting the party as a whole." Previously, the AfD lived under the simpler title of "suspicious case," and the threshold for intelligence service usage is notably higher for that classification.
The AfD, as you might imagine, isn't sitting idle. They've dived headfirst into the legal deep end. They're dead set on nixing the classification, and the court in Cologne will preside over their case—after all, the BfV calls Cologne home. The court had already ruled on the AfD's classification as a "suspicious case" in 2022—verdict: lawful.
Source: ntv.de, sba/dpa
The Enrichment Dish
As of May 2025, the AfD finds itself in the throes of a high-profile legal showdown with the BfV. The BfV recently toughened its stance on the AfD, classifying them as a "confirmed right-wing extremist" organization. This designation, effective on May 2, 2025, stems from the agency's conclusion that the AfD promotes an ethnicity and ancestry-based understanding that devalues entire population groups in Germany and violates their human dignity [3].
The AfD promptly contested the classification, alleging it to be "obviously unlawful" and accusing the authorities of attempting to criminize political criticism, particularly of Germany's immigration policy. The party filed a lawsuit at the Cologne Administrative Court, arguing that the BfV and the ruling parties—not the AfD—are the ones violating the constitution by employing the intelligence agency to target political opposition [2][3]. The battle rages on, with the AfD vowing to "exhaust all legal means to defend the free democratic basic order" [2][3].
- The current legal battle between the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) over the latter's classification of the AfD as a "confirmed right-wing extremist" organization is a continuation of a saga that began in the past.
- The BfV's employment of a "standstill undertaking" or a promise not to disturb the status quo, as seen in Jan 2021, is a tactic they've used before in response to the AfD's objections to its designation as a "suspicious case."
- The AfD, in its defiant response to being classified as a "confirmed right-wing extremist," has initiated a legal challenge in the Cologne Administrative Court, alleging that the authorities are violating the constitution by using the intelligence agency to target political opposition, specifically the AfD's criticism of Germany's immigration policy.
- The AfD's community and employment policies, as well as the broader implications of this legal battle, fall under categories such as general-news, politics, crime-and-justice, and extremism in constitutional protection.
