BERLIN, May 5, 2025 — Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has initiated legal proceedings against the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), challenging its recent designation as an “extremist” organization. The lawsuit, filed in the Cologne administrative court, includes an emergency petition aimed at suspending the classification, which permits enhanced surveillance measures against the party .
AfD co-leaders Tino Chrupalla and Alice Weidel contend that the BfV’s decision is politically motivated, asserting that it seeks to “distort democratic competition and delegitimize millions of votes.” They argue that the classification represents an abuse of state power intended to marginalize opposition voices .
The BfV’s designation, announced on May 2, grants the agency authority to monitor the AfD more closely, including deploying informants and intercepting communications. A confidential 1,100-page report underpins the classification, alleging that the party promotes racist and anti-Muslim ideologies .
The move has elicited international reactions, notably from the United States. Secretary of State Marco Rubio criticized the classification as “tyranny in disguise,” suggesting it undermines democratic principles. Vice President J.D. Vance echoed these sentiments, describing the AfD as “by far the most representative” party in eastern Germany and accusing German bureaucrats of attempting to dismantle it .
In response, Germany’s Federal Foreign Office defended the BfV’s decision, stating, “This is democracy,” and emphasizing that the classification results from a thorough and independent investigation aimed at protecting the constitution and the rule of law. The ministry added, “We have learnt from our history that rightwing extremism needs to be stopped,” underscoring Germany’s commitment to confronting extremism .
The Kremlin also weighed in, characterizing Germany’s action as a “restrictive measure” against non-mainstream political forces in Europe. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov suggested that the move reflects a broader suppression of dissenting viewpoints but acknowledged that the matter is an internal German affair .
Domestically, the classification has sparked debate over potential political ramifications. While some officials advocate for a ban on the AfD, incoming Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt expressed skepticism, noting that such a ban would require clear evidence of the party acting aggressively against democracy—a threshold that may not be met. He emphasized the importance of addressing the underlying concerns that have fueled the AfD’s rise .
The AfD’s legal challenge occurs amid a significant political transition in Germany. Christian Democratic Union (CDU) leader Friedrich Merz is poised to become chancellor following a coalition agreement with the Social Democrats (SPD). The coalition aims to uphold a longstanding consensus among mainstream parties to exclude far-right forces from governance. In the February snap elections, the AfD secured second place, trailing the CDU and ahead of the SPD .
As the Cologne court prepares to review the AfD’s lawsuit, the case is expected to have far-reaching implications for Germany’s political landscape and its approach to combating extremism.
Source; Al Jazeera
