AfD on democracy and the state

The AfD wants to noticeably reduce the length of court proceedings, especially in civil and criminal courts and in administrative proceedings. In its view, overly long proceedings damage citizens' trust in the rule of law.

Courts often take a very long time. The AfD wants cases to finish faster. Very important cases should come first. This should help citizens trust the state more.

According to the program, the rule of law has to prove itself in everyday life. When the justice system is under heavy strain, cases of special importance that send a signal for law enforcement would be handled first. The focus is on the ordinary courts, meaning civil and criminal courts, and on administrative proceedings.

The AfD wants judges to be chosen by an independent judicial selection committee, because it fears party-political influence when the government appoints them. It also wants to review the court structure reform to bring courts closer to citizens, organize civil and criminal courts in three tiers, and introduce a law on neighbor relations.

Today the government appoints the judges in the state. The AfD wants an independent committee to do this. Courts should be easy for people to reach. The AfD also wants a law for disputes between neighbors.

According to the platform, judges are currently appointed by the state premier or the justice minister, which it says endangers trust in an independent judiciary. It says the court structure reform removed many local courts or replaced them with branch offices that do not cover all important fields; a citizen-friendly correction is to be examined. For civil and criminal cases, the AfD favors a single court of first instance and a review court at state level plus a final appeals court at federal level. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is also to get its own Nachbarrechtsgesetz (law on neighbor relations) to help avoid disputes; courts so far often apply Schleswig-Holstein's law by analogy.

The AfD wants the federal and state flags to fly permanently in front of state agencies, courts and schools. Other flags, such as the rainbow flag, would be banned in front of public institutions because the party sees them as a breach of state neutrality.

Two flags should always fly at state offices, courts and schools. These are the German flag and the state flag. The AfD wants to ban other flags there. This includes the rainbow flag.

Where applicable, the municipal flag would fly alongside the federal and state flags. The platform justifies the ban on other flags with the state's duty of neutrality. The AfD backs municipal resolutions calling for official flags only and wants to change state law accordingly.

The AfD wants to strengthen binding referendums on the Swiss model and lower the hurdles for them. A petition signed by five percent of eligible voters would trigger a vote at state, county and municipal level, and there would be no turnout quorum.

People should vote on laws themselves more often. Fewer signatures should be needed for this. Five out of 100 eligible voters would be enough. There should be no minimum number of participants. The model is Switzerland.

Votes would cover changes to laws, large expenditures, and joining or leaving supranational organizations; the initiators would word the question. Ordinary laws would need more than half, and constitutional amendments more than two thirds, of the votes cast. The AfD justifies dropping the turnout quorum by saying it prevents boycotts through staying away. For local citizens' petitions, admissibility would be checked before signatures are collected, and the municipality would have to give binding advice on costs. The party wants to sharply reduce the topics excluded from citizens' petitions.

The AfD wants state money to go only to organizations that commit in writing to loyalty to the constitution and political neutrality. Funding for associations and initiatives it classifies as left-wing or far-left networks would end.

Associations often get money from the state. The AfD wants a new rule for this. Associations must promise in writing to be politically neutral. They must also support the constitution. Associations the AfD sees as left-wing should get no more money.

According to the platform, publicly funded associations intervene one-sidedly in political debate and equate criticism of the government and of migration with hostility to democracy. The democracy clause would apply to every state grant. Organizations close to parties, lobby groups on asylum policy and extremist structures would no longer receive money. The AfD wants criminal conduct by such groups to be prosecuted rigorously.

The AfD wants to give cities and towns more money without strings attached through the municipal revenue-sharing system, rather than through individual funding programs. New tasks or higher standards imposed on municipalities would be fully paid for. The party argues that local people know best what their community needs.

The AfD wants cities and towns to decide about their own money. They should get less money with fixed rules attached. If the state gives towns new tasks, it should pay all the costs. The AfD says local people know best.

Funds would flow mainly through general municipal revenue sharing, especially the flat-rate infrastructure grant. According to the program, earmarked funding programs create administrative work and narrow local room for decision-making. The AfD invokes the connexity principle, under which whoever assigns a task also bears its cost.