On June 2, it will be five years since the Kassel district president Dr. Walter Lübcke was murdered on his terrace by a neo-Nazi. It was an execution out of hate – for Lübcke’s commitment to a humane treatment of refugees. This political murder was a deep incision and triggered a debate: How can we better protect people who take on political responsibility in our country? Important legal amendments followed. They were right, but not sufficient. Because we are currently experiencing a dangerous spiral of escalation of political contempt and aggression. This spiral must be stopped. On May 3, Member of European Parliament Matthias Ecke was brutally beaten in Dresden to the point where he had to undergo facial surgery. It was the sad culmination of a large number of intimidation attempts, threats, and acts of violence in recent weeks. We must unequivocally show that the rule of law does not tolerate this violence – not against Greens, not against AfD politicians, not against representatives of any other party.
Attacks on politically active individuals occur not only in the eastern German states, as the assault on the third mayor of Essen has shown. And these incidents are increasing significantly: In 2023, 3,691 offenses against elected officials, representatives of political parties, and politicians were recorded, including 80 acts of violence. In 2022, there were 1,994 offenses, including 67 violent crimes. The victims are threatened, their offices are attacked, their homes besieged, their private property damaged or destroyed. The goal of the attacks is not only politics. Violence against volunteers or against law enforcement and emergency personnel also targets our society. The perpetrators celebrate themselves for their fight against a “system” they despise. However, they are and remain blunt criminals, despicable criminals. They must be pursued with high investigative pressure.
This is primarily a resource issue: We have strengthened the Federal Police by 1000 officers every year. Some states are also strengthening their authorities – this is exactly what we need, in the police force and also in the judiciary. Too many cases are dropped or not even taken up. It is good that police protection concepts have been ramped up, patrols increased, and dedicated points of contact for threatened local politicians and volunteers have been established. The federal government will continue to support the states’ police forces with the Federal Police wherever possible – for example, in large-scale operations at demonstrations or football matches. It is clear that the police cannot be everywhere at once. But visible presence and swift action make it clear: We do not leave room for violent offenders.
In addition to the police, the judiciary is also responsible. There is a need for faster proceedings and harsher, more noticeable consequences for the perpetrators. Only when punishment follows swiftly, the signal is sent: This society rejects your actions and will use the full force of the rule of law against them. Only courts should judge. But for me, it is clear that the rule of law should consistently utilize the existing penalty framework, especially for violent crimes. It is not about protecting certain groups better than others. Assault is assault, and it applies to everyone equally. What matters is that we must protect our democracy. Threats to the doorstep of local politicians must be prevented. Targeted penalties are meaningful here. Additionally, we will change the reporting laws to protect the home addresses of local politicians.
What is even more important is a more rigorous prosecution. If those who are threatened feel that a criminal complaint is useless and will not be followed up, it is devastating. Too many cases are quickly dropped or not even pursued because victims have to pursue private lawsuits. I firmly believe that there is always a public interest in prosecution in these cases because it concerns the protection of democracy. Accordingly, the guidelines for criminal proceedings should be adjusted. We must also consistently disarm extremists. This requires the amendments to the weapons law that I have proposed, especially more stringent controls on firearms. With the FDP, we have achieved a lot, but unfortunately not this. The case of the “Reichsbürger” terrorist group, which is now on trial for its militant overthrow plans and hoarding large weapons arsenals, shows how dangerous weapons in the hands of extremists are.
In a few days, we will celebrate the 75th anniversary of our Basic Law. It was designed as a robust constitution, especially in light of the failure of the Weimar Republic and the terror of the National Socialists. Therefore, the Basic Law places the dignity of every individual at the center. Today, in Germany, the AfD is a political force that repeatedly attacks the dignity of many people in our country. The Higher Administrative Court in Münster reiterated this very clearly just this week. The AfD is partly responsible for an increasing climate of hate and violence. Many remember the statement from Mr. Gauland (AfD politician) towards the Christian Democratic Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel: “We will hunt her down.” Such statements invite violent offenders to act on their words. It is essential to clearly identify the shared responsibility of those who increasingly and ruthlessly target and defame Democrats. Showing them the boundaries is our political task. We need to return to a political culture of respect.
