A panel discussion on local politics was to be held for those who work in the legal system in Hamburg, Germany earlier this month. Representatives of all the political parties that will be competing in Hamburg’s upcoming state election were scheduled to participate. The event was canceled at the last minute, however.
The reason? One of the invited parties was Alternative for Germany (AfD) – and some in Hamburg’s political and legal institutions consider them to be no better than Nazis, and unworthy of being heard at all. This has become clear both as the result of their public statements as well as a series of leaked official e-mails, which Freilich Magazine first reported on.
The elections to Hamburg’s state parliament are scheduled for March 2, exactly one week after Germany’s national elections, in which the AfD is expected to perform well. Senior Public Prosecutor Sebastian K. of the Hamburg Judges’ Association thus thought that this was an opportune time to have spokesmen from all the parties come together to address his colleagues on the theme of “Hamburg as a Legal Center: What Is it Worth to Hamburg?” The discussion was scheduled to be held on Feb. 6 in the Hamburg Regional Courthouse.
All of the parties acknowledged their participation. The AfD decided to send Dr. Alexander Wolf, a lawyer who is the deputy leader of the party’s group in the Hamburg State Parliament.
When Sebastian K. invited his colleagues to attend, however, it did not elicit the response he had hoped for. One of the judges in the regional court sent a reply message on Jan. 28, saying that she was shocked that a party that is “certainly at least partially right-wing extremist,” in her words, would receive an invitation to such an event.
This judge went on to say that the AfD’s Hamburg branch is using slogans that are comparable to those of the Sturmabteilung (SA), or Stormtroopers, the violent paramilitary force that helped Adolf Hitler come to power in Germany in the early 1930s. She also indicated that she was confused as to why the Hamburg Judges’ Association would allow the AfD to be represented “on an equal footing with representatives of democratic parties.” The AfD should not be given any attention whatsoever during the period of election campaigning, she concluded.
It should be noted that on Jan. 28, the day of the judge’s message, a mass demonstration against the AfD was held in the city of Hamburg. The police estimated that 60,000 people participated.
Also on Jan. 28, a motion to tighten Germany’s immigration policies in response to the deadly knife attack in Aschaffenburg on Jan. 22 was put forward by the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in the Bundestag. The motion narrowly passed with the help of the AfD, which horrified all of the enemies of the right throughout the country.
The next day, Carola Ensslen, a member of the Hamburg Parliament from the Left Party, and who was to have been one of the participants in the panel discussion, informed the assembly that the Holocaust is repeating itself, gesturing in the direction of the AfD’s representatives. She then said that “democrats must not make room for right-wing agitation.”
Ensslen’s sentiments were echoed by Lena Zagst, a member of the Hamburg Parliament from the Greens who had likewise been invited to participate in the discussion, on her Instagram account. Both Ensslen and Zagst then announced that they were boycotting the event in protest of the AfD’s participation.
Given that it was scheduled to occur the following week, the Hamburg Judges’ Association announced that the parliamentarians’ withdrawal so close to the date meant that the discussion would have to be canceled altogether.
The controversy didn’t end there, however. Another regional judge sent out an e-mail which has since been made public in which he bemoaned the fact that Friedrich Merz, the leader of the CDU, is “working with the fascists” to introduce a “xenophobic and probably illegal bill.” The judge advised that no one should participate in discussions involving the AfD, since “fascists and right-wing extremists like the AfD” are not interested in “discussions on the matter.”
A Hamburg public prosecutor who expressed his shock at the AfD’s invitation to the panel discussion gave his view that, given that the Hamburg Judges’ Association is a private rather than public institution, it is not bound by the constitutional requirement to remain neutral. He added that opponents of the rule of law such as the AfD should not be given a venue in which to spread their “often false” views, even though the prosecutor refused to give any examples of such views.
Another prosecutor went even further: “The judiciary is not neutral in this regard, but is rather called upon to actively support democracy,” he said.
Some judges also threatened to resign from their membership in the association.
These are only a few examples of the censorious rhetoric about the AfD that has been heard from public officials in Hamburg in recent weeks. It should be mentioned that while the response to the event was overwhelmingly negative, a few of the association’s members attempted to remind their colleagues that they must exercise impartiality, as mandated by the constitution – even when it involves “abhorrent political viewpoints.”
The German news portal Freilich contacted the Hamburg judiciary for their reaction to its members’ clear bias against the AfD – specifically, how it could be reconciled with the constitutionally mandated requirement for judges to remain impartial. The judiciary’s press agents refused to answer, however, referring such inquiries to the Hamburg Judges’ Association – despite the fact that many of these statements were made via the official e-mail accounts of members of the courts and prosecutors’ offices.
When Freilich contacted Dr. Alexander Wolf of the Hamburg faction of the AfD for comment, he denounced the accusations that his party is fascist or undemocratic as an “absurdity” that calls into question the sanity of those who make such statements. He further said that he believes it calls the impartiality of Hamburg’s judges and prosecutors into question.
It seems that some of those who participated in the e-mail discussions were aware of this, given that two of the judges involved suggested that the exchange should be moved to the Hamburg Judges’ Association’s private e-mail list, given that the accounts they were using were official ones.
The publication of the judges’ and prosecutors’ e-mails by Freilich has led the AfD to consider launching legal action against them. Krzysztof Walczak, who is the parliamentary secretary for the Hamburg faction of the AfD, said that these revelations are tantamount to a scandal “if it is true that several Hamburg judges .. used official e-mail accounts to conduct political agitation against a legal and constitutionally protected party such as the AfD.”
Walczak said that the situation is especially serious given that judges have a large degree of power to affect the lives of ordinary citizens.
“If every citizen now has to fear being treated unfairly by a judge because of his party membership, it not only means that there might be bias in individual cases, but it also undermines trust in the judiciary and the rule of law as a whole,” he explained.
Walczak believes that, if the e-mails are proven to be authentic, the judges’ actions could be construed as a violation of the Hamburg constitution, and it would then be possible to prosecute them in court. He said that the AfD is currently investigating whether or not they should submit an application for the judges to be indicted on the grounds that they have violated the constitution.
It is unclear how prejudice against the AfD from within the German state might impact their ability to govern if they win political power in Sunday’s national elections. One thing seems to be certain, however: They are not likely to get a warm reception from the existing establishment.
Germany: AfD Derangement Syndrome among Hamburg’s judges and prosecutors