Top German court to rule on far-right NPD ban

[webfact]

Top German court to rule on far-right NPD ban

By Madeline Chambers

REUTERS

 

Supporters of the far-right Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands (NPD) party hold up a banner reading 'Asylum fraud makes us poor' during a demonstration march in Dortmund, Germany, June 4, 2016. REUTERS/Wolfgang Rattay

 

BERLIN (Reuters) - Germany's Constitutional Court looks likely to reject on Tuesday a historic attempt by the country's 16 federal states to ban the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD), described by the intelligence agency as racist and anti-Semitic, say law experts.

 

The ruling comes amid fears of rising support for right-wing groups due to dissatisfaction over an influx of migrants. But outlawing a political party is difficult in Germany, in part, due to memories of how dissent was crushed in the Nazi era and Communist East Germany.

 

The NPD's own statements show its hostility to values enshrined in the constitution, say experts, but the ruling hinges on whether the NPD poses a threat to German democracy.

 

This is harder to prove, as the party has failed to capitalise on the refugee crisis, which shows its weakness as a political force while the anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany (AfD) has soared to 15 percent in some polls.

 

"The signs are mounting that the court will not ban the NPD," said Oskar Niedermayer, politics professor at Berlin's Free University.

Germany's domestic intelligence agency says the NPD, established in 1964, has about 5,000 members, in a country of 82 million, and links to some violent neo-Nazis. Several senior NPD figures have been convicted of Holocaust denial or incitement but the party denies any involvement in violence.

 

The NPD has never won enough support to win seats in the federal parliament and in September lost its last seat in a regional assembly, although it is represented on local councils.

 

Some experts argue that allowing the fringe NPD to exist would legitimise it and send a signal that its right-wing views are acceptable. Others say a ban could be counterproductive and push its members underground.

 

The chance discovery of the National Socialist Underground (NSU) in 2011, blamed for killing nine immigrants and a police woman between 2000 and 2007, prompted lawmakers to explore a legal ban. The first public hearing took place in March 2016.

 

Only two parties have been banned since World War Two - the Socialist Reich Party, a successor to Hitler's Nazis, in 1952, and the Communist Party in 1956 in West Germany.

 

The Constitutional Court has already thrown out objections put by NPD lawyers that the hearing would include details from state-paid informants - an argument that led to the collapse of a previous attempt to outlaw the party in 2003.

 

"My legal forecast is: there will not be a ban. My political demand is: no court can get rid of right wing populism or right wing extremism with a ban. We can only do that together," wrote Greens lawmaker Renate Kuenast, a trained lawyer, in Die Zeit.

 

(Reporting by Madeline Chambers; editing by Erik Kirschbaum and Ralph Boulton)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-01-17

[Saradoc1972]

They should not have brought this to court a second time, so soon after failing for the first time.

 

They (as in: all 16 German countries plus the feds) tried in 2003 and failed miserably. In Germany, a party can only be banned by the Federal Constitutional Court, the "Bundesverfassungsgericht", short "BVerfG" (the 16 countries all have their own constitutional courts, almost unheard of, more or less only handle rather obscure matters). The NPD is a rather unappetizing agglomerate akin to the British National Party or such, where most politics revolve around "Germany for the Germans" and "foreigners out" or something like that, blood and honour, and revisionism including holocaust denial. 'nuff said. Can you people please just pop out of existence? It's so saddening when young peoples' hair just don't seem to grow anymore and those right arms appear to be stuck up where they are.

 

In 2003 BVerfG declined after some hearings to pursue the motion by those 17 actors because their "Verfassungsschutzämter" (i.e. internal secret services, of which Germany likewise has an independent one for each of the 16 countries, plus a big one for the federal republic; and, no, this does not work)  had inserted just too many informers ("V-Männer", i.e. "Verbindungsmänner", which translates to informers, spies, snitches, or just people on the agencies' payroll) right up into the highest echelons of that party, so the court deemed it was no longer able to determine what positions the NPD had genuinely propagated, and which those paid henchmen had come up with in the first place. Major disaster, major loss of face for a state trying to ban a party it was now seen as having instigated to excesses itself.

 

So, when this first collapsed in 2003 the federal government decided it would have no part in a next round of proceedings, as they put it back then "If this fails again, we might just as well print a large supply of those black-white-red flags plus logo they give away for advertisement with tax-money in our federal printer-shop". While, possibly, the snitch problem might have been overcome to the satisfaction of BVerfG, we might know by tomorrow, proving they are actively fighting the German constitution, i.e. Germany being a free, lawful, parliamentary democracy, is tricky at best. There has been at least one expertise submitted to that effect, but those experts just can't seem to get into a matter-of-factual tone, always sound like they are on a mission. Tricky anyway, let's see what BVerfG makes of it.

 

Last hurdle will be the ECHR's ruling (that's the European Court of Human Rights, mind you, which sits in Strasbourg and has nothing to do with the ECJ, the European Court of Justice sitting in Brussels ruling on violations of EU-treaties; well, there *is* some kind of connection, but it needn't bother us here) that for a ban of a political party there also needs to be a palpable danger for the state in question and its democracy and adherence to human rights' standards.

 

NPD, with some 3 percent of voters (which kills them in the crib because of the five-percent threshold) in their strongholds in eastern Germany (special reasons for that, don't blame them, please, and don't call those areas "Dunkeldeutschland" ("Dark Germany"), as our sad excuse for a President Gauck did recently, he himself hailing from there), falls well short of that sort of threat. As a matter of fact they now, as per the last elections in Mecklenburg-Vorpommerania (short: McPomm, the rather lonely, scenic area along the Baltic coast next to Poland) in October 2016, they are no longer in any sort of parliament above communal level. It was all taken away from them by the newcomer-party AFD (Alternative for Germany). By now, all they have got is a total of some 350 representatives in isolated minority factions in a number of city halls. Big whoop.

 

So, as a couple of major figures in German politics have already let on, this procedure before the BVerfG is going to fail. Almost certain, we'll know by tomorrow,

 

As to the AFD, I would have a couple of things to say about them, as a matter of fact I am going to vote for them in September, come hell or high water, and it's going to contradict the runt from Reuters who wrote that article above on how they are supposedly anti-immigrant or something, but that's not the immediate topic here. They are not undemocratic because you don't like them, read their manifesto, then write your news-clips.

 

[zydeco]

But the German Communist Party is legal. But that's okay because Merkel was a Communist, too.

[Saradoc1972]

Forgot to include in my above post: most of the European states, supposedly democracies, apparently make do without provisions to ban parties.

 

In Germany's constitution from 1948, which was sort of imposed on it, but is not at all bad and has served as a model for a lot of states, it's in more or less for historical reasons. Whether that helps remains to be seen, right now the chief-whip of the CDU-faction (that's Merkel's Christian Democrats) in Bundestag is calling to apply criminal law for "wrong opinions" (sic!) published on Facebook. He really said "wrong opinions"!

[Saradoc1972]

1 minute ago, zydeco said:

But the German Communist Party is legal. But that's okay because Merkel was a Communist, too.

 

Can we leave the DKP (or KPD, I really would have to look up what they call themselves today) or the Marxist-Leninist-whatever, including the Judean People's Front, out of this? They are nowhere to be seen, apart from defacing other people's billboards. Nobody bothers, so should we. 

Merkel does seems to have her very own understanding of who kind of "owns" the state once you made it to the top, that much is clear.

[the guest]

I thought Germany supported 'freedom-of-speech', or is this only selective democracy at hand here?

[stevenl]

21 minutes ago, the guest said:

I thought Germany supported 'freedom-of-speech', or is this only selective democracy at hand here?

Many countries don't allow hatred enticing speech, and does not necessarily mean selective democracy.

[Saradoc1972]

18 minutes ago, the guest said:

I thought Germany supported 'freedom-of-speech', or is this only selective democracy at hand here?

 

Seems we are going that way... they are now calling for Facebook to ban "Fake-News", whatever that is, and defamatory statements (I personally so love to demean our rather short-of-growth Minister of Justice, Little Heiko (Maas), for being totally out of his depth in office) within 24 hours of notice from some adlatus from the CDU-government, or else. Plus, some Merkle-sycophant has been calling for minimum-sentence-guidelines for that sort of hate-speech, so state's attorneys and judges can no longer strike out any of those cases; naughty.

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, Saradoc1972 said:

 

Can we leave the DKP (or KPD, I really would have to look up what they call themselves today) or the Marxist-Leninist-whatever, including the Judean People's Front, out of this? They are nowhere to be seen, apart from defacing other people's billboards. Nobody bothers, so should we. 

Merkel does seems to have her very own understanding of who kind of "owns" the state once you made it to the top, that much is clear.

 

Are you proposing that only when / if they become popular should a party be banned? I hope that's not your meaning.

 

The fact Merkel decided to announce "open doors" for illegal migrants as well as real refugees, without consulting the German parliament or any of her EU leader colleagues speaks volumes about her understanding. But after so many years in power that isn't surprising really.

[Baerboxer]

26 minutes ago, Saradoc1972 said:

 

Seems we are going that way... they are now calling for Facebook to ban "Fake-News", whatever that is, and defamatory statements (I personally so love to demean our rather short-of-growth Minister of Justice, Little Heiko (Maas), for being totally out of his depth in office) within 24 hours of notice from some adlatus from the CDU-government, or else. Plus, some Merkle-sycophant has been calling for minimum-sentence-guidelines for that sort of hate-speech, so state's attorneys and judges can no longer strike out any of those cases; naughty.

 

Not just Germany. The liberal left PC parties only like free speech, news, comments that they agree with. Everything else they want to ban in anyway than can. Speak against them and you are denounced as a right wing fascist - not matter if your making a mild valid point. The last thing they want is their incompetence, corruptions, self interest pocket lining activities and mistakes being discussed publicly.

 

They have suffered with the information explosion - they can no longer stick to their version as being the only reality and have been embarrassed over and over again.

 

So now they seek to apply legal redress to silence people, stifle free speech and control the media outlets not owned by their sympathizers.

 

The last thing they want is real democracy, with real free speech, freedom of information and real accountability. All can be forgiven as long as your're PC and support the "right" people.

[Saradoc1972]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Are you proposing that only when / if they become popular should a party be banned? I hope that's not your meaning.

 

The fact Merkel decided to announce "open doors" for illegal migrants as well as real refugees, without consulting the German parliament or any of her EU leader colleagues speaks volumes about her understanding. But after so many years in power that isn't surprising really.

By the wording of the German Constitution, no, a party can be banned regardless how popular; by the ECHR's take.... well, they don't expressly say popular, but it would boil down to that in that it would take some real power, i.e. existing mandates or potential mandates, to be a threat to democracy and human rights.

 

I did not state a personal opinion as to that, apart from stating that most European states are making do without provisions to ban a party. As to the NPD I hope I was quite clear. Bit of a lawyer's take, I guess.

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, Saradoc1972 said:

By the wording of the German Constitution, no, a party can be banned regardless how popular; by the ECHR's take.... well, they don't expressly say popular, but it would boil down to that in that it would take some real power, i.e. existing mandates or potential mandates, to be a threat to democracy and human rights.

 

I did not state a personal opinion as to that, apart from stating that most European states are making do without provisions to ban a party. As to the NPD I hope I was quite clear. Bit of a lawyer's take, I guess.

 

Whilst you can appreciate what those in 1948 were thinking that's obviously open to misuse and achieving the opposite of intended purpose.

 

But throughout the West you can see now how the liberals, democrats, left, whatever they call themselves try to label any opposing view as extreme, false and try to get it suppressed. This tactic was used by the old East European communists albeit more overtly.

 

The EU, through Juncke, actually did this when he warned the German people not to vote for the AfD as the EU commission would not work with them.

 

These people are trying to change the political landscape of Europe to one in which yes, you can vote for a choice of people, but all those people are actually from the same liberal left PC parties. So nothing really changes other than people's names.

 

Dangerous times.

[Saradoc1972]

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Whilst you can appreciate what those in 1948 were thinking that's obviously open to misuse and achieving the opposite of intended purpose.

 

But throughout the West you can see now how the liberals, democrats, left, whatever they call themselves try to label any opposing view as extreme, false and try to get it suppressed. This tactic was used by the old East European communists albeit more overtly.

 

The EU, through Juncke, actually did this when he warned the German people not to vote for the AfD as the EU commission would not work with them.

 

These people are trying to change the political landscape of Europe to one in which yes, you can vote for a choice of people, but all those people are actually from the same liberal left PC parties. So nothing really changes other than people's names.

 

Dangerous times.

 

Can agree to that. See one of my above posts where that Christian-Democrat's party-whip misspoke without noticing, saying "wrong opinions" needed banning,  when supposedly he had been ordered to demand legal steps against "false news". Well, CDU supposedly are not "left", or "liberal"(which has a different ring to it in Europe than in the US), rather conservative, but they came to that sorry state when Merkel decided she just wanted to stay in power, not make the politics her party got elected for.

[Prbkk]

The murder trial mention in the Reuters piece is still going on in Munich. Two of the group are dead but a third, a woman, is charged with several counts of murder. Initial disbelief that it could happen in Bavaria, followed by astonishment at the police incompetence in not linking the cases, culminating in a trial that is front page news every day. These are not firures of fun, cartoon NAZI-wannabes....they are the real deal in the style of Brevik.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Not just Germany. The liberal left PC parties only like free speech, news, comments that they agree with. Everything else they want to ban in anyway than can. Speak against them and you are denounced as a right wing fascist - not matter if your making a mild valid point. The last thing they want is their incompetence, corruptions, self interest pocket lining activities and mistakes being discussed publicly.

 

They have suffered with the information explosion - they can no longer stick to their version as being the only reality and have been embarrassed over and over again.

 

So now they seek to apply legal redress to silence people, stifle free speech and control the media outlets not owned by their sympathizers.

 

The last thing they want is real democracy, with real free speech, freedom of information and real accountability. All can be forgiven as long as your're PC and support the "right" people.

Strange comments with a center-right party at the helm.

[Saradoc1972]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Strange comments with a center-right party at the helm.

Strange center-right party at the helm, if they still are at the helm of anything, that is, to warrant comments like that.

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, Saradoc1972 said:

Strange center-right party at the helm, if they still are at the helm of anything, that is, to warrant comments like that.

So who is at the helm then? "if they still are at the helm of anything"

[Saradoc1972]

18 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So who is at the helm then? "if they still are at the helm of anything"

You tell me. That is, if you either are or speak German (Austrian, Swiss, other minorities, I'm not picky) and have followed the news over the last 2 years....

Otherwise... whew, where to even start? Not gonna come back to that today.  

New topic? Germany going down the drain headline on TV? "Germany is abolishing itself" as by our own Mr Sarrazin from 2011?

Earnestly, between CDU and SPD, both in a so-called great coalition, being unable to come to much of an agreement about what needs to be done, further being blocked by a majority of countries in a red/green coalition in the second chamber, justice administration (along with effective deportation) being constitutionally in the hands of the countries, I don't think anyone could be considered at the helm of anything at the moment. Merkel pretends to be, that yes, but she totally, completely, deservedly isolated herself in Europe and frankly seems at wit's end inside Germany.

Orbán and Kurz, that's the Hungarian PM and the Austrian Secretary of State, seem to be at the helm, just not in Germany. I'd vote for both of them, if I could.

 

Duh. I see no reason why I should utter anything more optimistic. They're gonna get another whacking round the head by constitutional court today, but it's not like that is addressing what Holy Angela wrought upon us. Glad I live in Thailand. Really.

[stevenl]

You tell me. That is, if you either are or speak German (Austrian, Swiss, other minorities, I'm not picky) and have followed the news over the last 2 years....
Otherwise... whew, where to even start? Not gonna come back to that today.  
New topic? Germany going down the drain headline on TV? "Germany is abolishing itself" as by our own Mr Sarrazin from 2011?
Earnestly, between CDU and SPD, both in a so-called great coalition, being unable to come to much of an agreement about what needs to be done, further being blocked by a majority of countries in a red/green coalition in the second chamber, justice administration (along with effective deportation) being constitutionally in the hands of the countries, I don't think anyone could be considered at the helm of anything at the moment. Merkel pretends to be, that yes, but she totally, completely, deservedly isolated herself in Europe and frankly seems at wit's end inside Germany.
Orbán and Kurz, that's the Hungarian PM and the Austrian Secretary of State, seem to be at the helm, just not in Germany. I'd vote for both of them, if I could.
 
Duh. I see no reason why I should utter anything more optimistic. They're gonna get another whacking round the head by constitutional court today, but it's not like that is addressing what Holy Angela wrought upon us. Glad I live in Thailand. Really.

I speak German. And disagree with you on Merkel's position. She is far from isolated in Europe and very likely to stay PM after the next election.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[DM07]

I knew it: a bunch of Know- it-alls with their "freedom of speech" -rethoric and the "but the communists"- argument!

Great!

1) the NPD is a fascist organisation! They simply want to take away human rights from minorities, they would abolish freedom of speech the second they had any power, they take a big runny dump all over the constitution...but we should never infringe their right to freedom of speech on the grounds of said constitution!

Yeah...right!

2) I don't know who said it, but there is a quote something to the effect of "You can be a communist for humanitarian reasons- but you can never be a fascist for humanitarian reasons!" ...and before you have a go at me: this is about the IDEA of communism, not the fascism called communism by Mao or Stalin!

[the guest]

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

Many countries don't allow hatred enticing speech, and does not necessarily mean selective democracy.

 

Really, like the one-eyed, mr hook, and hate-preacher, that resided in the UK for years, before he was extradited to the USA.

[stevenl]

 
Really, like the one-eyed, mr hook, and hate-preacher, that resided in the UK for years, before he was extradited to the USA.

Nothing to do with my quote.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[Saradoc1972]

1 hour ago, DM07 said:

I knew it: a bunch of Know- it-alls with their "freedom of speech" -rethoric and the "but the communists"- argument!

Great!

1) the NPD is a fascist organisation! They simply want to take away human rights from minorities, they would abolish freedom of speech the second they had any power, they take a big runny dump all over the constitution...but we should never infringe their right to freedom of speech on the grounds of said constitution!

Yeah...right!

2) I don't know who said it, but there is a quote something to the effect of "You can be a communist for humanitarian reasons- but you can never be a fascist for humanitarian reasons!" ...and before you have a go at me: this is about the IDEA of communism, not the fascism called communism by Mao or Stalin!

We are in agreement. NPD are a fascist, racist, xenophobic, anti-semitic, antiquated, hateful, homophobic, distasteful, unappetizing bunch of knuckleheads seeking to abuse parliamentary democracy to overthrow the system as such, even if it takes presenting itself as a democratic party catering for other, innocuous issues to further their ends of adulating our Adolf and a German Reich of sorts. Period. 

 

Still, that is not enough, as such, to ban them. Someone has to decide, if their are to be banned, on factual findings. These someones are usually called "the courts", Federal Constitutional Court, in this case. Could ban anyone you like, if it were otherwise, i.e no hearings and no facts to establish. As in: you need to prove that, and they are right-wing extremists, they are not daft. With left-wingers, it's the other way round. You think they are going to hand an opportunity to ban them to you on a plate?

 

This is not about freedom of speech as per the US take on things (well, it might be... complicated, it's touching on many things, really), as per Article 21 (2)  GG, German Constitution:

 

Quote

(2) Parteien, die nach ihren Zielen oder nach dem Verhalten ihrer Anhänger darauf ausgehen, die freiheitliche demokratische Grundordnung zu beeinträchtigen oder zu beseitigen oder den Bestand der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zu gefährden, sind verfassungswidrig. Über die Frage der Verfassungswidrigkeit entscheidet das Bundesverfassungsgericht.

 

Ad hoc translation: "Parties, which by their intend or by the demeanour of their adherents are aiming to abolish or work to the detriment of the free, democratic, constitutional foundation or endangering the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany , are unconstitutional. It shall be the prerogative of the Federal Constitutional Court to decide upon the unconstitutionality. "

 

Ok? Factual findings are going to be tricky, court proceedings are absolutely necessary and will take time. Plus some other issues, as pointed out.

[Saradoc1972]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

I speak German. And disagree with you on Merkel's position. She is far from isolated in Europe and very likely to stay PM after the next election.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

 

Good. Follow the news. Better still: read this Jewish guy's take on things here: http://www.achgut.com/artikel/zu_merkel_faellt_mir_nichts_ein_fortsetzung1

 

Got his own Blog, "Die Achse des Guten": just an example of what's in stall 

 

Yes, Merkel is going to be the next Chancellor or "PM", again, 2017. Seemingly no way around it, with her sorry rest of a party going to score some 30% and the Special-Democratic-Party-of-Denouncers scoring a humble 20+%, her grace being unwilling to enter a coalition with AFD.

[Saradoc1972]

Over and out, they did not forbid NPD, because it was too small and meaningless to warrant that step.

 

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/npd-bundesverfassungsgericht-verbietet-rechtsextreme-partei-nicht-a-1130311.html

 

Oh, Der Spiegel, formerly the leading weekly political magazine in Germany, were stupid enough to tout out loud, NPD had been forbidden. They had been listening to Constitutional Court reading out the writ those German countries had submitted before the actual verdict and thought their dreams had come true; they apologized for that, but it only goes to show they've sunk to the level of a despicable tabloid. A mere shade of what that magazine used to be, not like I was going to buy it ever again before that lapse.

 

Totally lost touch, gone extra-leftwing, nobody needs them anymore, "Schad' um's Geld" as the then Chancellor Kohl said: a waste of money.

[stevenl]

Over and out, they did not forbid NPD, because it was too small and meaningless to warrant that step.
 
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/npd-bundesverfassungsgericht-verbietet-rechtsextreme-partei-nicht-a-1130311.html
 
Oh, Der Spiegel, formerly the leading weekly political magazine in Germany, were stupid enough to tout out loud, NPD had been forbidden. They had been listening to Constitutional Court reading out the writ those German countries had submitted before the actual verdict and thought their dreams had come true; they apologized for that, but it only goes to show they've sunk to the level of a despicable tabloid. A mere shade of what that magazine used to be, not like I was going to buy it ever again before that lapse.
 
Totally lost touch, gone extra-leftwing, nobody needs them anymore, "Schad' um's Geld" as the then Chancellor Kohl said: a waste of money.

Got it, they're not right wing enough any more for you to really appreciate Der Spiegel.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[Saradoc1972]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Got it, they're not right wing enough any more for you to really appreciate Der Spiegel.
 

 

Oh, I did appreciate DER SPIEGEL, did so for over a decade since they went online first, read that on a daily basis over my morning coffee until... sometime round 2014.

And they never were right-wing or anything, one columnist "Der schwarze Kanal", yes, and witty on top, otherwise they proudly claimed to be "left, if in doubt", and everyone knew.

It's just that appalling drop in quality that made me discontinue following them; apart from the cooking recipes, they're rather good at covering that sort of thing.

It's not for nothing they had to make over 150 workers redundant over the last year. Nobody want's to pay for that drivel anymore.

I am OK with press having views not matching my own, I accept if they offer a wide gamut of possible opinions, but what Spiegel has been offering over the last 2 years or so by way of commentary is nothing short of malignantly defamatory, usually against supposedly right-wingers, and, on top, poorly researched. Thanks, but no thanks.