The German state of Bavaria’s highest court of administration ruled on Wednesday that the state’s domestic intelligence agency (or Verfassungsschutz in German) can continue to surveil the Alternative for Germany (AfD) political party.
The AfD had sought a decision forbidding the surveillance, losing in lower courts and taking it to the last chance to appeal at the state level.
What else do we know about the ruling?
The Munich court said Wednesday’s decision was no longer subject to appeal.
It said that the queries raised by the AfD had already been addressed in prior rulings and that the objections therefore did not stand.
The court cited a case at the federal constitutional court, Germany’s highest, as addressing “the questions raised regarding the legal requirements for surveillance.”
It also said that last May, the federal administrative court had “in a manner beyond reproach” taken into account incriminating and exculpatory arguments while also taking into account issues like freedom of speech.
That court had found “certain statements attributable to the AfD regarding ‘remigration,’ defamation of people with a migrant background or of the Muslim faith, fantasies of overthrowing the government, or continued agitation against the free democratic basic order exceeded the limits of permissible criticism of the constitutional system,” the court said.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Is this happening elsewhere in Germany as well?
The plan to monitor the party in the southern state of Bavaria had first been announced in 2022 and the initial legal challenge was dismissed in 2024.
Several states have launched similar bids to observe the party or some of its members on suspicions of seeking to undermine the constitutional order in Germany. The federal domestic intelligence agency is pursuing a similar approach, classifying the party as a “certified right-wing extremist endeavor.”
This lowers the legal hurdles to establishing various forms of surveillance and monitoring such as communications intercepts and using informants.
Typically this is related to the resrtictive rules on far-right politics adopted after World War II in response to the former Nazi government.
The party tends to try to resist the measures, arguing that the step is not justified.
Edited by: Rana Taha
Don’t let the algorithm hide the news. If you rely on our team for trusted reporting, please take a moment to select us as a preferred source on Google, so you’ll always see our verified news first.
About The Author
