Unprecedented scenes by German standards marked the first meeting of Thuringia’s new parliament after the September 1 elections, due to the behavior of Alternative for Germany (AfD) deputy president Jürgen Treutler.
The Christian Democratic Party (CDU) appealed to the Constitutional Court, alleging unconstitutional behavior, while the state’s outgoing interior minister said the conditions are now met to begin a process to ban the AfD at federal level.
Based on the parliamentary tradition of the Thuringian parliament, the right to first propose a candidate for the presidency of the body belongs to the party that emerged first in the elections. If he is not elected, the process is repeated and, if it is unsuccessful again, in the third vote the remaining parties have the right to present a proposal, which, however, considered that the majority principle was violated when the president refused to allow deputies received the reason or submitted the request to change the procedure to a vote, which, it is clarified, is not mandatory.
Strong arguments and verbal attacks
Furthermore, the parties expressed concerns that the president would not allow new nominations even in the third vote, but would continue indefinitely with different AfD candidates. Chaos ensued, with MPs exchanging harsh words and AfD leader Björn Hecke verbally attacking MPs from other parties and denouncing a “cartel” against his own party. Indicative of the prevailing environment, it was not even possible to determine whether the body had a quorum, while, according to the director of parliament, the president acted as the elected president of parliament, to which he is not entitled.
Appeal to the Thuringian Constitutional Court
The CDU appealed to the Thuringian Constitutional Court, denouncing the conduct of Mr. Treutler and AfD deputies as a whole as unconstitutional, while the state’s Interior Minister Georg Mayer (SPD) favored a process to ban the party. “Events have shown that the AfD is taking aggressive and militant measures against parliamentarism. I think the conditions for a banning process are met”, wrote Mayer on the “X” platform (formerly Twitter).
According to Michael Brenner, professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Jena, the presiding judge “not only exceeded his powers, but also violated the rights of parliamentarians”.
German government spokesman Steffen Hempstreit admitted that images of parliament in Erfurt “concern and disturb many” but declined to comment on the possibility of a process to ban the AfD. It limited itself to stating that the state Constitutional Court is currently in charge, while the interdiction procedure by the Federal Constitutional Court should be the last resort.
Source: RES-MPE