AfD should vacate party headquarters: dispute with the landlord in court

This article first appeared at NTV.de.

Under a starry sky, it is about what the alternative is always so important for Germany: home. Large old lamps hang from the painted ceiling in the Berlin district court in the Moabit district. They illuminate a bizarre dispute and angry faces. The AfD threatens to lose its home in Berlin, its party headquarters.

The district court is negotiating an eviction lawsuit against the AfD federal association. The plaintiff is the owner and landlord of the office building in the Berlin district of Wittenau. The party’s federal office is housed there. It is clear that the party has to get out. Now it’s about the time.

At the beginning of the dispute, February 23, 2025. Alice Weidel, as the top candidate, had achieved the best AfD result so far at the federal level. The party won 20.8 percent of the vote and has been the largest opposition party in the Bundestag with 150 MPs.

The party celebrated in its headquarters on the election evening. The mood was a bit depressed, you had expected a better result. Nevertheless, there were beer, tents and a grill were built in the courtyard, the non -party logo was projected onto the wall of the house. And that is exactly the problem for the landlord. According to him, AfD outskirts are prohibited by rental agreement. In addition, access to the building was not possible due to barriers. The termination followed.

Many in the AfD could not really make friends with their headquarters. The unadorned office building is located from the Berlin government district. The seat in the industrial area is also not very representative. The party does not want to get out for the time being. Also because the search for a successor object should be difficult.

In 2022, the landlord and party had concluded a rental agreement by 2027. It was properly terminated by the landlord for 2026. But the election party was the point for the landlord where he wanted to get the party out of his building prematurely. Up to here, the descriptions of both sides agree, everything else is a bitter dispute.

On the one hand, the Austrian landlord Lukas Hufnagel, to whom the office building belongs. “My client no longer has confidence in his tenants,” says Hufnagel’s lawyer. But his client’s allegations now go far beyond the course of the election evening: Hufnagel complains. With the AfD as a tenant, he does not receive a new loan for the building, nor is it possible to sell the property. Hufnagel says he was blackmailed by the party. According to the Austrian, he was threatened to send him a “whole bus load of striker boys”. Hufnagel appears in court with two bodyguards. He claims that he receives threatening calls.

The AfD denies everything – not just the improper use of the office building. “We have done everything in our power. We are legally very relaxed at the process,” said the deputy federal spokesman and member of the Bundestag Kay Gottschalk, who represents the party as a defendant. According to their own statements, Hufnagel was offered a one -off payment as a compensation for the election party. He declined that. A blackmail never took place. “It is as if you are putting extortion to the Pope,” comments Gottschalk. He significantly rejects any accusation against members of the party. Hufnagel has been trying to save an apparently failed millions of real estate deals with media campaigns and legal maneuvers for months at the expense of the alternative for Germany.

In court, both sides argue about the truth – not only legally. The landlord is visibly annoyed, calls once in his Austrian accent “I don’t care!” When it comes to whether a possible rent increase could solve the situation. The judge has to intervene several times and remind the plaintiffs and defendants to rest.

Hufnagel accuses the deputy party board member Kay Gottschalk of being known as “lies-kay” in the party. Hufnagel is also not Gottschalk’s “personal prostitute”. The AfD, otherwise loud and riotous in the Bundestag, is holding back. In his part, Gottschalk does without allegations in the process. A comparison fails. The AfD offers the landlord a slight rent increase of a few percent. Hufnagel rejects this. The AfD offers the landlord to take off a few weeks earlier. Hufnagel also rejects this.

After the failed comparison, it gets calmer. The judge opens the actual hearing. The judge talks about the legality of illuminated facades and the contractual use of office buildings. The party logo on the wall on the election evening violated the rental agreement, the judge said. But is this violation also for termination without notice? The AfD could not be blamed that access to the building was blocked by demonstrations and police barriers. There is no judgment in the Berlin district court on this day. So at least for the time being, the AfD remains what is so important to it: your – in this case unpopular – home.

Transparency note: the star is how NTV Part of RTL Germany.