Explainer: What Can Germany’s Far-Right AfD Achieve with Its Blocking Minorities?

By Thomas Escritt

Berlin – Following a second-place finish in the Brandenburg state elections on Sunday and a victory in the Thuringia state elections earlier this month, the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party now holds a blocking minority in two regions.

Why Is a Blocking Minority Important?

In Germany, significant decisions—such as amendments to the constitution or key appointments that affect democracy and the rule of law—require a two-thirds majority. Consequently, any party that can secure a third of the votes in parliament, representing a substantial segment of public opinion, can establish a blocking minority.

The two-thirds majority requirement is designed to prevent any single party from seizing control and instigating radical changes, a lesson drawn partly from the Nazis’ rise to power in 1933. The intent is to facilitate widespread agreement among multiple parties before enacting significant transformations.

However, a blocking minority can also allow a party like the AfD, which opposes liberal democratic principles, to disrupt governmental functions, particularly through delays in judicial and security appointments.

Where Is a Two-Thirds Majority Necessary?

In Thuringia, a two-thirds majority is essential for appointing members to the state Constitutional Court, as well as for positions on the committees responsible for judicial appointments and oversight of security services. In Brandenburg, a similar requirement exists for appointing Constitutional Court judges and making constitutional amendments. Additionally, securing the AfD’s support is crucial for dissolving parliament and calling for new elections.

Will the AfD Block All Nominations?

On election night, the radical AfD leader in Thuringia, Bjoern Hoecke, indicated intentions to utilize the blocking minority to prevent other parties from excluding them from power. This sentiment was mirrored by AfD officials in Brandenburg.

The party has faced accusations of leveraging legislative and judicial intricacies to obstruct state institutions across Germany, thereby maximizing its influence without formal legislative authority. The AfD contends that it is merely exercising its democratic rights.

When Is the First Critical Appointment?

The first significant appointment requiring a two-thirds vote will occur with the upcoming replacement of a Constitutional Court judge in Thuringia. In Brandenburg, a critical vacancy will not arise until 2029, which may limit the party’s immediate influence.

What Potential Issues Might Arise from a Blocking Minority?

Following the immediate judicial replacement in Thuringia, all remaining judges’ terms will end by 2029. Many lower court judges in this former Communist region have served since German reunification in 1990, indicating that a surge of retirements is imminent. If replacements cannot be appointed, this could result in significant delays in the judicial process.

What Are the Broader Implications?

Polls suggest that the AfD capitalizes on a widespread perception that the state is inefficient and requires drastic reforms. Extended delays in legal proceedings—from business registrations to criminal cases—may intensify this sentiment, even as the AfD contributes to the backlog.

Although Thuringia is relatively small, representing less than 3% of Germany’s population, disruptions there could resonate far beyond its borders, potentially swaying voters across the country as the national elections approach next year.

What Actions Can Be Taken?

At the national level, both government and opposition parties have recently agreed to amend the constitution to prevent any future party from undermining the Federal Constitutional Court, which serves as a crucial protector of German democracy.

However, in Thuringia and Brandenburg, it may already be too late. State politicians might find themselves compelled to negotiate, formally or informally, with the AfD, despite their public reluctance to engage with the far-right party.

Legal scholars are exploring whether the federal government could intervene by assigning its judges and courts to manage cases in Thuringia as an emergency measure.