State Parliament: Expert: AfD is testing the limits of the constitution

According to the Jena constitutional lawyer Michael Brenner, the free mandate of the MPs was violated during the turbulent first state parliament session in Thuringia. The AfD instrumentalized the meeting “to demonstrate a bit of democracy, the rules of procedure and perhaps also the Thuringian constitution and to test the limits,” said the professor of German and European constitutional and administrative law at the Friedrich Schiller University in Jena.

He perceived the actions of the AfD senior president as a staged play. “Above all, I would see a violation of the free mandate of the MPs. Because this mandate also includes the right to be able to take part in the parliamentary process, to be able to submit motions and to be able to give speeches,” said Brenner.

Senior president in criticism

The constituent session in the Thuringian state parliament ended on Thursday after several hours with a scandal. It was interrupted and the CDU parliamentary group called the Constitutional Court to have the proceedings clarified. At the meeting, the senior president Jürgen Treutler (AfD) represented the legal opinion of the AfD parliamentary group, ignored requests from the MPs, tried to deprive them of the floor and repeatedly refused to allow them to speak. He received sharp criticism for this.

Brenner said that due to the actions of the senior president, the MPs were deprived of their very own right to exercise their free mandate. But one can also recognize violations of the democratic principle and the majority principle. “I don’t know of any previous case that has a similar extent.”

Expert sees constitutional violation

The dispute between the AfD and the other four factions in the Thuringian state parliament is essentially about the election of the state parliament president. As the strongest faction, the AfD has the right to propose candidates, but has no right to have its candidate elected. The CDU and BSW want to change the rules of procedure before the election so that other factions can also propose candidates right from the start. The Constitutional Court should now decide whether this change can take place before the election.

Brenner made it clear that he did not share the AfD’s legal opinion. “If one were to follow Treutler’s opinion, the newly elected representatives would have to submit to the rules of procedure that the old representatives of the seventh state parliament have drawn up. That cannot be the case. When the new state parliament has met, then it has the right to decide for itself organize,” said the expert. He expects the constitutional judges to come to the conclusion that the behavior of the senior president would violate the constitution.

The state parliament session was interrupted until Saturday morning; a court decision could still be made on Friday. “I would like the Constitutional Court to also say a few sentences about the role of the senior president in order to prevent similar games from being played on Saturday,” said Brenner.