Legal scholar demands new election over AfD financing

A legal scholar has demanded a repeat of the upcoming state election in Sachsen-Anhalt after determining that the AfD’s campaign financing violated election law. Sophie Schönberger, a professor of constitutional and administrative law, told reporters the party’s state parliamentary faction illegally subsidized campaign events by covering venue costs for so-called “citizen dialogues”—gatherings that were openly used for electoral advocacy. These payments blur the line between public dialogue and campaigning, Schönberger said, and could trigger a legal challenge under German election law. If successful, such a challenge might lead to a mandate review and, ultimately, a re-run of the election. Two other legal experts, Fabian Michl and Joachim Wieland, agree with her assessment.

However, Christoph Möllers, another constitutional law professor, warns that overturning an election carries severe consequences. Schönberger’s analysis now focuses on Sachsen-Anhalt, where the AfD holds the second-largest faction in the state parliament. If her findings hold, they could force authorities to reconsider the validity of seats won in the October 2026 election. Meanwhile, lawmakers in Thüringen are preparing for the first parliamentary hearing on a potential party ban against the AfD. Nine experts, including former domestic intelligence chief Hans-Georg Maaßen and comedian Hape Kerkeling, were invited to testify in the state’s Justice Committee at the request of the Left Party faction.

Kerkeling warned that a ban procedure could risk escalating tensions if not handled carefully. Legal scholars remain divided on the prospects of a ban. Chan-jo Jun, a constitutional lawyer, argues that even initiating proceedings would send a disciplinary signal to the party. In contrast, Christian Conrad, a defense attorney for the AfD, dismisses the idea as politically motivated, noting the party would suffer reputational damage regardless of the outcome. The Society for Civil Rights (GFF) has also faced criticism after publishing a legal analysis supporting the possibility of an AfD ban.

Its Legal Director, Bijan Moini, reported receiving personal attacks—some with racist overtones—following the report’s release. Moini announced he would leave the GFF to return to private practice, citing the need to focus on constitutional litigation without public controversy. The SPD’s federal parliamentary faction has entered the debate with a 19-page policy paper on defending democratic resilience. Among its proposals: establishing a federal-state working group to prepare a potential ban application, restricting changes to the Federal Constitutional Court Act to require Bundesrat approval, and allowing the court to intervene if state constitutional courts become dysfunctional. The paper also calls for financial penalties against state governments violating constitutional principles.

In Ungarn, a Budapest appeals court recently reduced the prison sentence of Maja T., a non-binary activist convicted in 2024 for participating in militant anti-fascist protests in Budapest that turned violent. The court cut the original eight-year term to seven years and ordered the start of extradition proceedings back to Germany, where T. faces additional charges. The case highlights tensions between German and Hungarian authorities over the handling of far-right and far-left extremism. T.’s defense argued the original sentence was disproportionate, given the lack of evidence linking T. directly to organized violence beyond the protests.

The appeals court’s decision also triggered bureaucratic steps: the ruling and procedural records were forwarded to the LG Gera and local prosecutors to finalize extradition. The SPD’s push for stricter democratic safeguards extends to broader legal frameworks. Its policy paper proposes tightening the Federal Constitutional Court Act to require Bundesrat approval for any amendments, ensuring regional parliaments have a formal say in shaping the court’s jurisdiction. The Bundeskabinett approved a draft law to harshen penalties for attacks on essential workers, including police, firefighters, and healthcare staff. The proposal raises the maximum prison term for resisting a law enforcement action from three to five years.

Additionally, courts will now be required to strip convicted individuals of their passive voting rights if sentenced to at least one year for incitement to hatred. The LG Frankfurt is set to deliver its final verdict Thursday in the case of a Narkosearzt convicted of manslaughter after administering a contaminated anesthetic to a four-year-old girl during a dental procedure. The Bundesgerichtshof had partially overturned the original conviction, faulting the lower court for failing to establish intent to conceal the doctor’s error. Prosecutors argue the defendant delayed calling for emergency help, suggesting an attempt to cover up medical negligence, while defense attorneys contend the delay stemmed from panic rather than malice.

The trial of Gerhard Delling, an accomplice in the 2019 abduction of Christina Block’s four children, entered a critical phase as he testified for nearly two hours about the family’s circumstances. Delling described a non-violent household under Block’s care, insisting she had no prior knowledge of the abduction plot. He claimed to have organized the trip to Baden-Württemberg after informing her the children were there, contradicting earlier accounts that framed the disappearance as a premeditated act. The 15-year-old daughter, who previously invoked her right against self-incrimination, has since spoken publicly in a podcast about the trauma of the ordeal, though her testimony remains excluded from the court record.