Jens Spahn and some fellow campaigners ignite the fire wall, while others claim that there are no more fire wall – at least in East Germany. Once again, the question is currently being ventilated in all talk shows: Is the AfD a normal party, and how normally should you deal with it? The arguments often turn in a circle, and the AfD itself does not have to do anything and enjoys the survey results. Anyone who should need hard facts can now read the publicist and lawyer Joachim Wagner that the AfD is in no way a normal party.
Where the AfD does not continue politically – and that is still the case at the moment – it tries out the dishes. Wagner, formerly known as the moderator of the ARD show “Panorama”, has taken the trouble to sack more than 150 judgments on AfD court proceedings. The realization: “Never before in the history of the Federal Republic has a minority party used as many complaints as a political fighting instrument as the right outer party.” And this instrumentalization has its price: the ability to work for the courts is getting closer to their limits.
More than 80 percent of the lawsuits unsuccessfully
Basically, this whole substantial analysis is probably the most extensive legal comment on the AfD's political style and the handling of the other parties with these democracy and democracy. The ban on partying, the work of the constitutional protection offices up to everyday parliamentary life with the eternal question is discussed: Which items can the AfD politicians get and which not. It becomes clear that the AfD wants to convert political defeats into victories very consistently in court; So far, this has not been part of it either in the countries or before the Federal Constitutional Court. 80 percent of the 51 complaints in Karlsruhe were unsuccessful; In the countries 86 percent of 151 files submitted. The legal process has so far not paid off for the party and factions – although Wagner has surprisingly significantly significant decisions in different federal states. “Defensive constitutional state and judiciary have largely passed the stress test AfD.” So far, the judiciary has not been abused as a “lever to gain power”.
But what does that mean specifically for the other parties? The book was created before the Bundestag election, which is why Wagner very often refers to the successful performance of the AfD in East Germany in 2024. In his analysis, the judgment of the Higher Administrative Court of Münster for the classification of the AfD through the protection of the constitution of May 13, 2024. He leads a high risk of a possible ban on the party and cited from the press release: “What is sufficient for suspicion anti -constitutional endeavors, does not necessarily lead to the acceptance of an proven extremist endeavor. ” Wagner is on a line with the ex-constitution judge Peter Müller, whom he always quotes extensively. For those who still call for a ban, Wagner has a tough judgment ready: For him, the demands are only a “replacement strategy” of political “help and perplexity”.
And the thing with the posts in parliament? Here, too, Wagner goes into the depth and looks at the development since 2017, because in the beginning the AfD also had committee precedes in the Bundestag. In his opinion, there has been no empirical evidence so far that the “omission strategy” (no vice presidential post, no committee on good) has worked in the Bundestag since 2021. The supporters of insulation policy had still not become clear that they would promote the victim narrative of the AfD. Everything is more complicated in the countries anyway, so there is everything – Afdler in sensitive committees, hard rejection with dozens of voting and even blockages of entire bodies for years.
What strategy has worked so far? No
Wagner's unpleasant conclusion: except for the short time after the Correction-Arsche and the large demonstrations against “Remigration” plans have so far had no political strategy against the AfD. But how does he measure this success? His only indicator is the election and survey results. The reading of the sober analysis-also through foundation financing, weapons law and right-wing outside player in the FC Bundestag-brings enough knowledge and creates a broad factual basis for the judiciary not in the duel with the AfD in the duel. The judgments can also be concluded other than Wagner.
A little suddenly, the advice comes on the last page, which could really help: get illegal migration under control and abolish individual asylum law in national and European law. Jens Spahn should like to hear that.
