The former Federal Constitutional Court judge, Udo Di Fabio, has cautioned against a polarized approach to the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, advocating for measured observation alongside heightened scrutiny of its evolving trajectory. Speaking to “Bild am Sonntag”, Di Fabio highlighted the party’s contribution to societal division, arguing that its messaging – fostering the belief that migration threatens national stability or that it aligns more closely with the Kremlin than with European leaders – fuels antagonism. He simultaneously warned against equating the AfD with the Nazi party, a comparison he believes exacerbates polarization and risks alienating the significant portion of the German population – roughly a quarter – currently supporting the party.
Di Fabio acknowledged the potential for individuals within the AfD to harbor sympathies for Nazi ideology and symbolism, emphasizing the need for vigilant monitoring to ascertain the party’s future direction. While he deemed a potential AfD ban, a legal process to prohibit the party’s existence, “potentially promising” and “possibly politically necessary” should the party further radicalize and actively seek to undermine the constitutional order, he doubts the current legal threshold is met. He urged caution, suggesting that the option of a ban should be “kept in reserve” for future contingencies.
Regarding potential government participation following upcoming state elections, Di Fabio views it as realistic only if the AfD fails to secure an absolute majority. He anticipates that mainstream parties will form coalitions amongst themselves in that scenario. However, should the AfD achieve a decisive electoral victory, he concedes that denying them the opportunity to select a Minister-President and form a government would be unconstitutional. Di Fabio pointed to the German Basic Law’s provisions that permit intervention against a state government which transgresses constitutional boundaries, clarifying that even an AfD-led government would be bound by law. While cautioning against apocalyptic predictions regarding democratic collapse, he characterized the situation as a “serious challenge.
Di Fabio insisted on maintaining the “firewall” – essentially, the refusal of other parties to cooperate with the AfD – “as long as it is possible and necessary”. He allows for the possibility of the AfD moderating its stance, but expresses a prevailing concern that the party will continue on a path of radicalization, presenting itself as an “alternative to a free Germany”. His remarks underscore the delicate balance between confronting a rising political force and avoiding fueling the extremism it embodies.