PdF on democracy and the state

The PdF wants to cap the number of positions politicians may hold at once and tighten the rules on awarding contracts to relatives and party-affiliated organizations. This is meant to strengthen credibility and fairness in the political system.

The PdF wants clear rules for politicians. Politicians should not hold too many positions at once. Contracts for relatives should only be possible in an open process. Anyone who misuses public money should face quick consequences.

A ceiling would apply to positions inside and outside the party; only those that can be carried out within a reasonable workload would be allowed. Contracts for relatives up to the third degree and for organizations close to a party would require a transparent procedure. For violations of anti-corruption laws or misuse of public funds, the platform calls for swift and consistent consequences for those responsible.

The PdF wants to strengthen the justice system with more staff, better pay and digitalization. This is meant to shorten proceedings and secure trust in the rule of law.

The PdF wants to strengthen the courts. Judges and prosecutors should get more pay. There should be more staff. Files should be digital everywhere. This should make court cases faster.

Judges and prosecutors are to be paid in line with European standards. More staff is meant to absorb the growing workload and shorten proceedings. A "rule of law campaign" with information and education offers is meant to attract young people to careers in the justice system. In addition, the platform calls for modern procedural rules that allow digital technology and fully electronic files everywhere.

The PdF wants to involve citizens more in political decisions through digital citizens' parliaments and citizens' assemblies. This is meant to counter disenchantment with politics and make decisions more transparent and better legitimized.

People should have more of a say. They should be able to join debates of the Bundestag online. Citizens' assemblies should give recommendations. A citizens' assembly is a group of citizens who discuss a topic. Parliaments must deal with what they recommend.

Through digital platforms, citizens are to be able to take part in important debates and votes of the Bundestag. Citizens' assemblies are to draw up recommendations on important questions that serve as a basis for parliamentary deliberation and possible referendums. If a parliament rejects a recommendation, it must give comprehensible reasons. In referendums, the results of the relevant citizens' assembly must be taken into account.

The PdF wants to strengthen referendums at the federal level through a dedicated law and give them a firm institutional basis. This would let the public decide key questions directly, as a complement to representative democracy.

The PdF wants stronger referendums at the national level. In a referendum, citizens vote on a question themselves. A new law should make this possible. Groups that work for democracy should also get more support.

A federal law would strengthen the right to referendums and secure it institutionally. The platform sees this as a complement to representative democracy. In addition, democratic engagement should not be hampered by organizations losing their nonprofit tax status. Initiatives for democracy and citizen participation would get a clear legal and financial framework.

The PdF wants to set up a digital platform for petitions, feedback and participation. The federal government would develop it as open-source software and give it to states and municipalities free of charge. Results of citizen participation would be publicly documented.

The PdF wants a website for citizen participation. People can submit concerns, join debates and vote there. The federal government builds the site. States and towns can use it for free. Everyone should be able to see the results.

The platform is meant to be user-friendly and follow uniform standards. The federal government would develop it as open source and provide it to all levels of government at no cost, which the platform says saves money and encourages uniform use. Results of participation processes would be documented, published and fed into political decisions. There would be regular public reporting on implementation.

The PdF wants to abolish the five-percent threshold or replace it with alternatives, arguing that it disadvantages small parties and leaves votes unrepresented. It also calls for backup votes or ranked-choice voting.

Parties now need five percent of the vote to enter the Bundestag. The PdF wants to end or change this rule. Voters should also be able to rank parties. If the first party fails, the vote goes to the next one.

In the platform's view, the threshold limits small parties' chances and leaves part of the voters' will unrepresented. Abolishing it or finding other solutions is meant to increase competition and diversity in the Bundestag. Under ranked-choice voting, voters would rank parties on the ballot. If their first choice falls below the threshold, the vote transfers to the next party in the ranking.

The PdF wants to add the option of voting "No" on the ballot. These votes would count in the allocation of seats, but the corresponding seats would stay empty.

The PdF wants a "No" box on the ballot. Voters can use it to reject all parties. These votes should count. The seats for them in parliament stay empty.

The platform argues that real freedom of choice includes rejecting everything on offer. "No" votes would be included in seat allocation just like party votes, but those seats would remain vacant. This is meant to make dissatisfaction with the available parties and candidates visible.

The PdF wants to build citizens' assemblies permanently into democratic structures. They would meet regularly, be filled by lottery, and policymakers could reject their proposals only with a stated justification.

In a citizens' assembly, randomly chosen people discuss one issue. The PdF wants such assemblies to meet regularly, for example every month. Members get paid for taking part. Politicians must explain why if they reject the proposals.

The assemblies would meet at fixed intervals, for example monthly, each dealing with one issue of major public interest. A lottery is meant to ensure a representative makeup, and financial compensation is meant to promote equal opportunity. Participants would be given comprehensive and objective information, with as much transparency as possible. If policymakers reject proposals, they must give comprehensible reasons. Follow-up steps such as popular initiatives would be allowed.

The PdF wants to drop the minimum vote threshold for public party funding and lift the cap that ties it to a party's self-generated income. In its view, the current system disadvantages small and financially weak parties.

Parties get money from the state. Today they need a minimum number of votes for that. The PdF wants to end this limit. Small parties should get money too. State money should no longer depend on donations and member fees.

Every vote would count equally for funding purposes, so parties with small election results would also receive money. The rule that parties can get no more public money than they raise through donations and membership dues would be dropped. According to the platform, that rule favors parties with wealthy backers. Parties should be able to focus on political work and citizen participation.

The PdF wants to introduce citizens' forums, regular assemblies and digital dialogue spaces in municipalities. Local votes should offer more options than just yes or no.

The PdF wants people to have more say in cities and towns. There should be citizens' forums and regular meetings. People should also be able to join in online. Votes should offer more choices than just yes or no.

According to the platform, many people feel shut out of local decisions. Citizens' forums and assemblies would develop decisions together with residents. Digital dialogue spaces would allow ongoing participation regardless of location. New voting models with graded options and compromise proposals are meant to improve the quality and acceptance of local decisions.

The PdF wants to make it mandatory to involve citizens' parliaments in drafting important laws. A legislative footprint would disclose which interest groups influenced a law and when.

The PdF wants citizens to take part in making new laws. Citizens' parliaments should do this. They must always be heard on important laws. Each law should also show which groups influenced it.

The platform criticizes a lack of transparency in lawmaking, especially regarding interest groups, and too few ways for the public to get involved. The legislative footprint would record exactly who contributed to a bill and at what point. Citizens' parliaments would become standard for relevant laws and guidelines. This is meant to bring the public's views into the process early.

The PdF wants to develop the right to petition into a digital platform for ideas. Petitions could be prioritized by the public, would be reviewed within a deadline, and would get a comprehensible answer if rejected.

With a petition, citizens can send a request to parliament. The PdF wants to make petitions easier. People should be able to vote on petitions online. Each petition should be reviewed within a fixed time. A rejection needs a clear explanation.

The platform cites OpenPetition as a model. Petitions would appear in a digital backlog where citizens set priorities by voting. Access would be barrier-free and allow sign-in with an electronic ID (eID). Every petition would be entitled to qualified handling within a deadline. Rejections would have to be explained transparently.

The PdF wants all meetings between politicians and lobbyists to be documented and the lobby register tightened. Stricter, uniform transparency rules should also apply at the EU level.

Lobbyists speak to politicians on behalf of companies or groups. The PdF wants all such meetings written down. A website should show this information. Rule-breakers should face tougher penalties. The EU should have stricter rules too.

A footprint for elected representatives and for individual bills would make lobbying influence visible, and a central transparency portal would publish the information. The lobby register would get stricter rules, tougher sanctions for breaches of disclosure duties and close checks by independent bodies. The party rejects unofficial channels of influence. At the EU level it calls for tighter rules for the lobby register and intergroups and for uniform disclosure standards.

The PdF wants to support youth citizens' assemblies, set up digital platforms where young people can have a say, and expand civic education in schools. The platform cites a widespread sense of political powerlessness among young people and sees it as a threat to democratic values.

Many young people think politicians do not listen to them. The PdF wants to support youth citizens' assemblies. These are groups of young people who advise politicians. Young people should also be able to have a say online. Schools should teach more about politics.

According to the platform, 72 percent of young people think their views do not matter to politicians, and 78 percent feel politically powerless. Youth citizens' assemblies would give young people direct influence on decisions. Easily accessible, interactive online platforms would collect their concerns and enable direct exchange with politicians. More civic education in schools would provide the knowledge and skills needed to get involved in society. Under the heading of intergenerational fairness, the PdF also backs projects that foster dialogue between age groups.