Neo-Nazi lawyer in AfD parliamentary group: What is behind it?

The AfD district parliamentary group Konstanz has employed a lawyer with a right-wing extremist background. The lawyer, Matthias B., has been active in the neo-Nazi scene for around 20 years and used to be a official of the neo-Nazi party the third path and candidate for the NPD. In Bavaria, he was prohibited from a legal legal clerkship due to concerns about the constitutional loyalty. Matthias B. was also part of a neo-Nazi association banned in 2014. After his legal clerkship in Saxony, B. is now a lawyer with a focus on criminal law.

The AfD district parliamentary group planned to put various asylum issues on the agenda, including an obligation to work for asylum seekers. However, the district administrator rejected these issues, and the Administrative Court of Freiburg agreed because the district council was not responsible. Inquiries from SWR to Matthias B. and the AfD remained unanswered. It remains unclear whether he represented the AfD in further cases in Baden-Württemberg. At the same time, the party tried to bring similar asylum issues to the agenda in the district councils Rhein-Neckar and Waldshut.

legal arguments

Another aspect concerns Matthias B.'s rejection into the legal clerkship in Bavaria, which was lawful, as the decision of the Federal Administrative Court (BVerwG) confirms. Matthias B. had a long -term anti -constitutional activity that ranged from membership in the NPD and a function in the "Free Network South" to engagements in the third path. The President of the Bamberg Higher Regional Court had rejected his application for admission to the legal clerkship in March 2020. B. then complained of this rejection, but the Würzburg administrative court classified its political activity as against the free democratic basic order.

Matthias B. also tried to apply for the legal clerkship in Thuringia and Saxony, but without success. The Saxon Constitutional Court decided in favor of B. and ordered its retrospective attitude in Saxony. In the meantime, he has completed the second state examination and works as a lawyer in Bavaria. B., however, would like to determine that the rejection in Bavaria was illegal. The BVerwG has approved the revision due to the fundamental importance of the case.

In the course of the negotiation, it was discussed, among other things, whether activities for a legal but anti -constitutional party can be taken into account when admission to the legal clerkship. The BVerwG found that legal clerks are also part of the administration of justice and that they are not allowed to act against the basic values ​​of the constitution. The path through the instances for Matthias B. now seems to have ended because the Federal Constitutional Court had already rejected a constitutional complaint.