The Society for Civil Rights has called out the right-wing Alternative for Germany for its tough stance on immigration and alleged efforts to erode democratic processes
A left-liberal German NGO has made a case for declaring the country’s largest populist party unconstitutional. The Society for Civil Rights argues that the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party’s platform and rhetoric regarding immigration, citizenship, and minority groups constitute sufficient grounds to ban it under the country’s strict post-war democratic laws.
The AfD, which advocates for tougher immigration laws and opposes Germany’s support for Ukraine, came in second at 20% in last year’s federal elections. An INSA opinion poll earlier this month indicated that the AfD had emerged as Germany’s most popular party with 29% support.
On Thursday, the Society for Civil Rights, an organization resembling the American Civil Liberties Union which receives funding from George Soros’ Open Societies Foundations, presented its 1,500-page “expert report” claiming that the right-wing party’s positions on multiple hot-button issues are in breach of the German Basic Law.
”The expert opinion is unequivocal: The AfD is unconstitutional,” the paper, which supposedly draws on millions of social media posts by party members as well as press releases and parliamentary documents, concludes.
According to the NGO, the federal government still has not banned the party because the AfD presumably “formulates its anti-constitutional positions in such a way that domestic intelligence agencies find as little evidence as possible of an anti-constitutional orientation.”
In its analysis, the Society for Civil Rights claims that the party supposedly “intends to persecute its political opponents.” It cites images of prominent political figures behind bars found on AfD-related social media accounts as well as demands to bring members of other parties before court.
Moreover, the party advocates an “ethnically and culturally defined concept of the nation” and wants to strip naturalized citizens and dual nationals who have committed crimes of their citizenship, the paper says.
The NGO has also taken issue with the fact that the AfD has proposed granting family loans solely to parents who both hold German citizenship. Another problematic policy that presumably points to the party’s unconstitutionality is the AfD’s calls to make the deportation of failed asylum seekers easier.
According to the Society for Civil Rights, the AfD’s demands for a ban on Islamic headscarves in public institutions as well as the construction of minarets in Germany are also inexcusable under the country’s constitution.
One more cause for concern for the liberal NGO is the party’s refusal to pander to transgender narratives and its belief that there are only two biological sexes. “The AfD advocates for a societal ‘model of the normal family’ consisting of a father, mother, and as many children as possible,” the paper laments.
The Society for Civil Rights has argued that the party must be outlawed as soon as possible as “it succeeds in mobilizing supporters and drawing attention to its issues.”
“It is the second-largest party in the Bundestag and is represented in 15 of the 16 state parliaments,” the NGO has warned.
On its website, the Society for Civil Rights lists among its donors the Open Society Foundations and its European offshoot, which were founded by Soros, who has injected more than $32 billion into the network.
Critics have long accused the Hungarian-born billionaire of fomenting various protest movements across the world, interfering in elections, and attempting to suppress dissenting views.
Meanwhile, the AfD has for years faced significant pressure from regional and federal authorities in Germany. Last week, the Bavarian Administrative Court of Appeal gave the local office of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency the green light to continue surveilling the local chapter of the AfD.
Earlier this year, the state of Lower Saxony imposed the “confirmed right-wing extremist” status on the regional branch of the party, following in the footsteps of Brandenburg, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, and Thuringia.
The label gives the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) wider powers to surveil the AfD and its members.
At the federal level, the right-wing party is subject to a lower-level designation that also permits monitoring, though under tighter judicial controls. However, the federal authorities have been seeking an upgrade of the surveillance status for the AfD, with the final decision currently on hold pending the outcome of a legal appeal by the party.
Read the full article here