German Christian Democrats clash over proposed AfD party ban

Following the state election in Saxony-Anhalt, the Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union (CDU/CSU) are seeking a strategy against the victorious Alternative for Germany (AfD).

Hendrik Wuest, the Minister-President of North Rhine-Westphalia whose name is mentioned for the CDU leadership, proposes examining the possibility of banning the party.

The Hessian CDU and its Bavarian sister party, the CSU, reject the idea, arguing that the outcome would be uncertain and that the process would take too long.

Wuest’s push to establish a federal and state-level working group on the constitutional handling of the AfD is met with scepticism even among influential CDU colleagues.

“I still believe that the AfD must be politically marginalised,” said Hessian Minister-President Boris Rhein.

Rhein added that, in principle, everyone should have the freedom to discuss any subject, but warned against believing that a quick solution is possible.

In this context, the CDU politician referenced his experiences with the last ban proceedings against the NPD (National Democratic Party), which lasted several years and proved inconclusive.

Speaking on the sidelines of an event at the Representation of the State of Hesse in Brussels, he noted that this should always be kept in mind.

At the time, the judges of the Federal Constitutional Court ultimately concluded that the NPD was indeed pursuing unconstitutional aims.

However, according to their assessment, the party lacked the potential to successfully achieve those aims, and they therefore rejected the ban application.

CSU leader and Bavarian Minister-President Markus Soeder had previously expressed a view similar to Rhein’s.

“I completely understand that one might prefer the AfD not to exist, but the reality is that a ban under constitutional law is practically unenforceable,” Soeder said following a cabinet meeting in Munich.

In addition to years of legal proceedings, he stated that there is also a risk of the AfD gaining “martyr” status. Soeder argued that the AfD must be confronted on the substance of its policies.

Following the AfD’s election victory in Saxony-Anhalt, Wuest had earlier called for the party to be examined by a group consisting of federal and state experts, constitutional scholars, and officials from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution.

“The real question is how the state, under constitutional law, should handle a party that pursues unconstitutional aims in at least some states,” the CDU politician explained.

According to him, the inquiry should be open-ended and not automatically lead to proceedings to ban the party.

Speaking in Brussels, Rhein said that following the elections in Saxony-Anhalt, the Union’s goal must be to “bring people out from behind the firewall and build bridges to the political centre.”

This means talking to people, taking their concerns seriously, and then translating these into very concrete policies.

One of the most critical statements regarding the AfD came from former CDU Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Saying that “as a CDU member, her heart bleeds,” Merkel noted that she views the Saxony-Anhalt election results as a turning point in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Merkel also took a clear stance on how her party should deal with the AfD. She implied that she is not very fond of the “firewall” (Brandmauer) policy used by the CDU and Chancellor Friedrich Merz against the AfD.

“I did not invent it, nor do I particularly like it,” the former Chancellor said, noting that they cannot convince anyone with this slogan and that “democratic parties” must stop obsessing over the AfD and instead explain their own projects.

Merkel advised political parties to adopt a different communication style. Recommending that “democratic parties” seek greater contact with the public, the CDU politician argued that the absence of a shared information pool due to “personalised feeds” on social networks makes this more difficult.