Unions Leaders Threatening Legal Action Against Berlin and Saxony-Anhalt Over Constitutional Concerns
Politics

Unions Leaders Threatening Legal Action Against Berlin and Saxony-Anhalt Over Constitutional Concerns

As ongoing discussions concerning future state governments in Berlin and Saxony-Anhalt proceed, the faction leaders from the CDU and CSU across various federal states are exerting pressure. They are threatening to file lawsuits with the Federal Constitutional Court if a government led by the AfD in Saxony-Anhalt, or a red-green-red coalition in Berlin, were to adopt a governing program containing laws that violate the Basic Law. This position was detailed in a joint declaration reported by the “Welt.”

The faction heads of CSU and CDU, specifically in Niedersachsen, Bayern, and Thüringen (Sebastian Lechner, Klaus Holetschek, and Andreas Bühl, respectively), stated that whichever federal state governs, it is bound by the Basic Law and, consequently, by the principle of the rule of law. They emphasized that electoral successes achieved by “radical or extremist parties” do not grant them a free pass to transgress constitutional boundaries.

As concrete examples, the three top politicians referenced the preliminary survey results from the Social Democrats (SPD), the Greens, and The Left in Berlin. Based on the Berlin sondage findings, they highlighted specific “constitutional violations” that would loom under the leadership of “radical parties.” These include budgets that exceed the “constitutional limits of the debt brake” through “exorbitant indebtedness,” the introduction of a “unconstitutional foreign voter law,” and a nationalization law that ignores the “constitutional requirements for property protection, proportionality, and compensation.”

Furthermore, they pointed out that the AfD’s electoral program in Saxony-Anhalt also contains unconstitutional demands, chief among them the abolition of compulsory schooling. The declaration from the Union chairpersons concludes with a broad warning: regardless of the state, electoral successes and political majorities achieved by “radicals and extremists” do not justify a “breach of the constitution.”