A fire in Germany’s political landscape was set by the federal federal service to protect the Constitution (YPS) to evaluate “with certainty” as a far -right party the alternative to Germany AfD, which until recently described as “suspected” of far -right ideology.

The representatives of the party Alice Videl and Tinos Kroupala has been a direct reaction, with the designation of the decision as purely policy and as a “heavy blow to parliamentary democracy”. As they have announced, they intend to appeal against the ruling, without having first specified how they are thinking of doing so and what they will seek.

Finding “Dynamite”

Storm of statements was followed by representatives of the entire political spectrum with opinions being completely divided, both between political and legal circles, on whether this decision paves the way for the procedure to begin the procedure. Afd or not. It is indicative that German security television expert Holger Schmidt described the finding as “dynamite” about the political developments coming next.

The issue of a possible ban was also concerned with the Ministry of the Interior, with the responsible Minister Nancy Fezer handling it with great care, pointing out the excellent powerful insurance valves on the government so that the prosecutions are not easy for political reasons.

Feser now said that the decision-order of the Ministry is completely independent of political interventions and documented with data included in a massive 1,100-page envelope. But once again he clarified that there is no “automation” in relation to a possible ban.

Calm

Outgoing Chancellor Olaf Saltz, who even reminded the difficulties that had previously been in the past, was also opposed to rushing conclusions and decisions on the knee, such as that of the NPD.

It was interesting, however, the placement of Fezer’s successor Alexander Dobrid by the Bavarian Christian Socialists, who undertakes the ministry from next Tuesday and estimated that the case would certainly be a judicial examination without explaining which side. However, Marcus Zender’s “proposer” called the decision of the Constitution Protection Service as a final awakening signal, which shows that there should be no tolerance for right populism. “The wall of democracy remains in its place. No demonization, but no complacency. “

Some Christian Socialist MPs called on their AfD colleagues to resign from the party.

In favor of the start of the process of banning the party, the representatives of the Greens and the Left was promoted. In fact, the former found an opportunity to attack the Christian Democratic Representative spokesman, who had recently proposed that the AfD “like all other parties” be treated.

Without direct consequences

This decision, however, does not have any immediate practical consequences for the party. It simply gives an additional argument to those who support the proposal of its prohibition. The government, parliament or upper parliament of the state can take a relevant initiative. The verdict will be the competence of the Supreme Federal Constitutional Court. Some Christian Democrats even suggested that there be a common appeal on all three sides to justice with the request of the ban.

On the part of human rights organizations and associations there have been new calls to strengthen the “wall of democracy” and excluding AfD policies from public positions and posts.

What should also be noted is that the justification of the decision now removes the argument from some to say that they “do not know” exactly what they are voting for.

In evidence and specific references, the Ministry estimates that AfD ignores the first article of the German Constitution on respect for human dignity and the principles of the rule of law, while its attitude is overall is a stance of the democratic order in the country.