editor in the policy.F. A. Z.
At a Meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa in Pretoria, Merkel said at the time, she wanted to make "for internal political reasons, a preliminary note". The choice of kemmerich's called a "unique process" that got broken with a "basic conviction" that "no more fixes are to be obtained with the help of the AfD"; this is "unforgivable", the result would be reversed.
The AfD wants to now, that the Federal constitutional court finds that Merkel's Statements, the party had violated their right to equal opportunities. Also, the Transcript of your Speech is to be deleted from the website of the Federal press office. The party relies on several decisions in which the judges had the duty of Neutrality of members of the government in the political debate closer to the outlines.
Seehofer as a precedent
Recently, the court found in June that the Federal government was injured Minister Horst Seehofer (CSU), the rights of the AfD, because on the website of the Ministry for an Interview and it is linked to had been in which he had described the AfD as the "state of catabolic". At the beginning of 2018, the judge, the AfD had given in a similar dispute with the then Federal education Minister Johanna Wanka (CDU) right.
In the case, Seehofer made it clear to the judge that a government should participate as a member of an "outside his official function" in the political battle of Opinions. But equality of opportunity is compromised, if "the Expression on the a member of the government resources available to, or a recognizable reference to the government office and, thus, the Expression of a from the authority of the office flowing special weighting provided". Whether a Statement "took place under specific recourse to the authority of the government office or the associated resources", should be determined according to the circumstances of each individual case.Updated Date: 22 July 2020, 14:19