A proposal by several Bundestag members to initiate proceedings to ban the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has stirred considerable debate. Critics, including SPD politician Ralf Stegner, warn that such a move could backfire, potentially increasing support for the AfD by allowing it to adopt a 'martyr' stance. Stegner emphasizes the need for a thorough and balanced discussion in Parliament, highlighting the risk of dividing democratic factions while uniting those opposed to democracy.
A cross-party group of members from SPD, CDU/CSU, the Greens, and the Left has reportedly drafted a motion to petition the Federal Constitutional Court to ban the AfD. Despite high legal hurdles, proponents believe a parliamentary debate is necessary. SPD's Gesine Schwan, however, argues that a ban would be politically counterproductive, driving more citizens towards the AfD, particularly those disenchanted with pluralistic democracy.
Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck from the Greens asserts that sufficient evidence is crucial for a ban, while FDP's Frank Schäffler dismisses the proposal as a distraction from political discourse. The government claims it is not involved in the deliberations, with no known contacts between the initiators and Interior Minister Nancy Faeser.
CDU's Roderich Kiesewetter supports the debate but remains undecided about voting for a ban. He stresses the importance of discussing how to handle a party that recently disrupted the Thuringian state parliament. Meanwhile, BSW leader Sahra Wagenknecht criticizes the proposal as the 'dumbest of the year,' arguing it would serve as a campaign gift for the AfD.
Under Article 21 of the Basic Law, a party can only be banned if it seeks to undermine or abolish the democratic order through aggressive actions. The stringent requirements set by the Federal Constitutional Court make the success of such proceedings uncertain.
