Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe is examining whether the AfD’s parliamentary group violated lawmaker Jan Wenzel Schmidt’s rights by expelling him. Schmidt was removed from the group in March after making allegations about nepotism within the party, and has asked the court to review the decision.
The dispute followed a debate over AfD members allegedly employing relatives of other party lawmakers in their offices. In an interview with the online outlet Nius, Schmidt, who represents Saxony-Anhalt, accused party colleagues of exchanging mandates and arranging jobs and payments among themselves.
The AfD’s Saxony-Anhalt branch initiated proceedings to expel Schmidt from the party, later joined by the party’s national leadership. His membership rights were also suspended. Schmidt challenged those measures before party arbitration bodies, so far without success.
In a request for his removal from the Bundestag group, its leadership argued that Schmidt’s interview had seriously damaged the group and its members’ reputations. It also said that claims about internal processes should not have been aired publicly, according to dpa.
Schmidt says his expulsion infringed rights guaranteed to him as a member of parliament. In a written statement ahead of the hearing, he said leaving a parliamentary group can significantly limit a lawmaker’s ability to participate in parliamentary work. He described his case as an effort to clarify the constitutional limits on expulsions, not as a political break with the AfD. The AfD group declined to comment before the hearing.
Members of parliament generally have equal rights and duties, but participation by lawmakers without a group can be restricted to ensure the parliament functions. For example, unaffiliated members usually receive less speaking time than group members.
The court’s published outline for the hearing indicates that it will consider how the AfD group handled the expulsion, including whether Schmidt was heard, whether the vote was secret and whether the required quorum was met. The judges will also examine what grounds can justify expelling a lawmaker from a parliamentary group.
The Federal Constitutional Court has not previously ruled on a parliamentary-group expulsion. State constitutional courts have generally accepted such expulsions when there is an important reason, while giving groups discretion and reviewing whether their decisions were arbitrary. A ruling in Schmidt’s case is expected in several months. The case number is 2 BvE 2/26.
Sources: Tagesschau.