Fact check: Is Germany’s AfD not right-wing extremist? | World News

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) has filed a lawsuit against the German domestic intelligence agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), which recently labeled the far-right party as “confirmed right-wing extremist.”On Thursday, the BfV complied with the AfD’s request to follow a so-called “standstill commitment” (Stillhaltezusage). This means that the agency is putting its official reclassification of the AfD as a right-wing extremist party on hold.AfD leaders Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla celebrated the news as a success.Claim: “This is a first important step toward our exoneration and toward countering the accusation of right-wing extremism,” the party said on X. The post added that the BfV has effectively “withdrawn” the party’s classification as “confirmed right-wing extremist.”DW fact check: False.The classification “confirmed right-wing extremist” was not withdrawn.The AfD, which increased its number of seats to 152 (out of 630) in the last parliamentary election in February, applied to the court to issue an injunction order if the BfV were to reject the “standstill” order. Both instruments are legal tools that can be used by plaintiffs to ensure that an authority must pause measures that the plaintiff considers unlawful.“The Federal Office has now preempted the issuance of such an injunction by issuing the ‘standstill’ order, which means that the Federal Office will refrain from designating the AfD as a ‘confirmed right-wing extremist’ party and will not treat it as such until the proceedings have been concluded,” said Markus Ogorek, director of the Institute for Public Law and Administrative Theory at Cologne University.Ogorek’s view coincides with comments by Michael Ott, presiding judge and press spokesman at the Administrative Court of Cologne: “The Federal Office considers its classification to be correct, it has only suspended the designation to give the court time to carry out a proper review,” he said.This would give the responsible judges time to work through the over 1,000-page report, he said. If the BfV had refused to suspend its decision, the court could have issued an injunction. This would have also frozen the previous decision to prevent the plaintiff from suffering “a potentially irreversible disadvantage,” as Ogorek explained.Who is Alice Weidel, co-leader of Germany’s far-right AfD?According to the research department of the Bundestag, Germany’s lower house of parliament, the classification of the AfD as “confirmed right-wing extremist” is primarily an “internal classification by the authorities.” In individual cases, the decision could result in the BfV setting a lower threshold for intelligence surveillance methods compared to the previous status as a “suspected case.” This could mean recruiting undercover agents or making covert video and audio recordings.However, the legal requirements for such tactics are met in both cases.‘This is everyday administrative procedural business’“The fact that the AfD or the AfD’s legal representatives are interpreting this ‘standstill’ promise as if it were the first partial success in the proceedings must be firmly contradicted,” said Ogorek. “This is everyday administrative procedural business, so to speak. It’s got nothing to do with the prospects of success.”The BfV also issued such a pledge during a case in 2021 after the AfD filed a lawsuit against its classification as a “suspected case.” In that case, the court later issued a suspension order. The reason given by the court was that “there was every indication that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution had not kept to its promise to remain silent or had not taken sufficient care to ensure that no information relevant to the proceedings leaked out.“Prior to this, the German media had reported widely on the proceedings. Then, in 2024, a Münster Higher Administrative Court ruled in appeal proceedings that the BfV was allowed to monitor the AfD as a “suspected case.”