After a year-long review, our findings are in: evidence proves the AfD is unconstitutional
Our AfD report is the most rigorous examination of the party ever undertaken, and it gives politicians and the public the clarity they have been waiting for: A case to ban the AfD would, in all likelihood, succeed.
A ban of the AfD has been debated for years, but until now nobody could say with confidence how a case before the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) in Karlsruhe might fare. Our report closes that gap. It is the first legal study to examine the conduct and aims of the AfD as a whole, applying a rigorous and consistent scientific method. It stands as the most comprehensive and academically robust assessment of the party to date, and gives the debate over a ban a solid new evidential footing.
The report shows: The AfD is driven by a racist worldview and is working systematically to undermine Germany's free democratic order (Freiheitliche demokratische Grundordnung). The report finds that the party intends to suppress political opponents using the means of the criminal justice system, and is already intimidating them today. This is a clear breach of the democratic principle (Demokratieprinzip). We also identify five groups whose dignity (Menschenwürde) would be violated if the AfD were to take power: Muslims, Germans with a migrant background, people seeking asylum, and trans and non-binary people. A party ban also requires proof that a party has the capabilities and strategic means to carry out its aims. The evidence shows the AfD has both.
Want the full picture? Scroll through our interactive summary, or read the entire AfD report.
The report has been a massive undertaking. Eight experts in constitutional law, right-wing extremism and data analysis spent more than 13 months gathering, individually analysing and legally assessing over three million data points. We exclusively used publicly available sources and applied the same strict standards the Federal Constitutional Court has used in previous ban proceedings. Two independent reviewers, the prominent constitutional scholars Professor Christoph Möllers (Humboldt University Berlin) and Professor Sophie Schönberger (Free University Berlin), have confirmed our methodology, our openness to different outcomes, and our scientific rigour.
The report was produced with no predetermined outcome and is entirely independent, funded by private donations from 20,000 people. If you'd like to support our continued work for a strong democracy:
