[ad_1]
These days, only the AfD can strike such a test deal. 600 delegates are traveling from all over Germany to Kalkar on the Lower Rhine for their party’s convention. In addition, around a hundred observers are expected. While others canceled their party’s congress, like the CDU, or argued digitally, like the Greens, the AfD relies on an in-person event at the “Wunderland”, an amusement park with accommodation.
Despite the partial closure at the national level, the meeting can still take place. The Crown Protection Ordinance of the state of North Rhine-Westphalia allows this, and the state Ministry of Health has no objection.
However, the AfD is upset by the conditions imposed on the party and its delegates. They should always wear a mask in the hallway. The party sued the Münster Higher Administrative Court against this general mask requirement. The conditions are “too far-reaching and therefore disproportionate interventions,” justified Federal Board member Alexander Wolf. Here, “the freedom of activity of political parties is unduly restricted.”
However, the Münster judges dismissed the claim and justified their urgent decision with the legitimate purpose of “curbing the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.” The party thus faces a delicate task. You must ensure compliance with the mask requirement and exclude participants from the event in case of violations.
The AfD leadership knows that there are some resolute mask objectors in their own ranks. He calls on delegates to adhere to the guidelines in any case. “We will punish violations of these rules, regardless of the person,” announced President Jörg Meuthen.
People are likely to arrive restlessly
Beyond the dispute over the leadership, the handling of the requirements of the crown could become a central theme of the party congress, carefully watched by the regulatory office of the city of Kalkar. In the AfD, many are likely to relish the role of the resistance, proud to defy the mask requirement that its particularly vehement supporters have rejected.
Some of the party leaders had speculated on the cancellation of the party congress. Especially since they themselves are not convinced of the project and the event will be difficult to convey to some of their voters. The party leadership knows that, according to polls, many AfD supporters are in favor of strict measures from the crown.
A rejection by the authorities would have suited some. It would have given them the opportunity to present themselves as victims of government harassment and, at the same time, they would have avoided the meeting. It is said that people can travel to the Lower Rhine in discomfort. There are those who take the virus very seriously and insist on following the rules.
Before the party congress, however, no one at the top openly expressed their concerns. The federal office is not aware of any cancellation by delegates, a spokesperson says.
In the first weeks of the pandemic, the AfD had spoken out in favor of particularly strict rules, but then changed course. She thinks the confinement is excessive. In her response to the chancellor’s government statement on Thursday, parliamentary group leader Alice Weidel said the federal government “had already caused more damage than the virus itself” with its measures. The AfD hopes to benefit from dissatisfaction with the economic consequences of the restrictions at the latest when the pandemic in the country is under control.
Has particular difficulties with masks. The Bundestag faction has filed a claim in vain against the mask requirement in parliament. Her judge Stephan Brandner, who is a member of the federal executive board, calls her “a nuisance.”
Kalkar Municipality has announced that it will take a closer look. Mayor Britta Schulz considers the party conference irresponsible, which she cannot ban. The regulatory office announced strict controls. In case of massive violations, the authority would have the right to cancel the event. Party leader Meuthen, however, assumes that the meeting’s leadership will not allow him to go that far with strict insistence on regulations.
