The Alternative for Germany (AfD), which the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has partially classified as right-wing extremist, is enjoying record highs in opinion polls. At the same time, hundreds of thousands of people have been taking to the streets to demonstrate against the anti-immigration party.

The German Bundestag is also debating how to deal with the AfD, with the three governing parliamentary factions — the center-left Social Democrats (SPD), the Greens and the neoliberal Free Democrats (FDP)— submitting a motion on the issue. The topic: "Resilient democracy in a diverse country — a clear stand against the enemies of democracy and their plans of forced displacement."

The move was prompted by a media report about a meeting last fall of right-wing extremists, attended by AfD officials as well as members of the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU). The gathering is said to have been about plans for the so-called remigration, or expulsion, of millions of people who have immigrated to Germany.

In the parliamentary debate, Bernd Baumann, the AfD's parliamentary secretary and chief whip in the German parliament, told lawmakers the meeting was no more than a "small, private debate club," but not a "secret meeting dangerous to the public."

But Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD) called it "an active effort to shift borders and to spread contempt for democracy and misanthropy into the heart of society."

Faeser said she could also imagine banning the party — but only as a last resort.

How can a party be banned?

The last attempt to ban a party concluded — and failed —  in 2017, in a move against the nationalist and racist National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD), which has since renamed itself "Heimat" ("Homeland"). The Constitutional Court found at the time that the splinter party was so insignificant that it posed no threat to democracy and therefore did not ban it.

Unlike the former NPD, the AfD has been enjoying a wave of popularity. However, it has only been confirmed as "right-wing extremist" in three of Germany's 16 states.

The Federal Constitutional Court has set high hurdles for the banning of parties. In an interview with DW, Christian Pestalozza, a constitutional law expert in Berlin, explained that one prerequisite was there must already be a certain probability that the party in question will at some point have enough weight to achieve its goals.

AfD could have its fund withheld 

It's easier, however, to exclude an anti-constitutional party from state funding. In Germany, parties are financed by membership fees, donations and tax money. The greater number of votes a party receives in elections, the more it is entitled to receive from state coffers. For the AfD, this currently amounts to over €10 million ($10.8 million).

According to Pestalozza, it would be easier to exclude a party from this kind of funding, rather than a ban, because of its allegedly unconstitutional goals. "That they are committed to such goals would be enough, without having to prove that they have the potential to implement them," he said.

Even if the AfD's political program sounded relatively harmless, showing that the reality is quite different could be enough, said Pestalozza.

"But whether these conditions have already been met is a matter of speculation. This is something that authorities at the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Germany's domestic intelligence agency, which has been monitoring the party and some of its state affiliates, know better," he said.

As a so-called observation case, the AfD may be subject to surveillance in the states of Thuringia, Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt using secret methods such as phone tapping. Pestalozza believes that excluding the party from state funding, at least in these federal states, is possible.

To do so, the government or parliament would have to submit the relevant motion. The Federal Constitutional Court could then still come to a completely different conclusion than the intelligence agency. However, Pestalozza stressed that this outcome would be unlikely.

Could individuals' basic rights be revoked?

Another way to combat perceived enemies of the constitution would be to revoke individuals' basic rights. This would mean that they would no longer be allowed to run for public office. Opponents of Björn Höcke recently launched an online petition aiming to prevent the AfD firebrand from becoming state premier in Thuringia's state election in September. His party is currently polling well over 30%.

However, constitutional law expert Azim Semizoglu of the University of Leipzig doubts Höcke's basic rights can be revoked. Similar efforts have never been successful, he said, and the hurdles for such proceedings are also quite high.

Semizoglu does not consider such an attempt to be completely futile, as it takes less effort to investigate a single person for allegedly being against the constitution than it does to investigate an entire party.

Debates on banning the AfD and other possible sanctions against the party or individuals notwithstanding, Semizoglu believes that democracy in Germany is strong enough to defend itself against its enemies.

"It's an encouraging moment to see so many people taking to the streets against racism," he said.

This article was originally written in German.

While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter Berlin Briefing.