The rise of Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) in recent state elections, particularly in Thuringia and Brandenburg, has given the far-right party a blocking minority in two regions. This newfound power enables the AfD to influence significant legislative and judicial processes, raising concerns about its potential to disrupt the functioning of democratic institutions.

What is a Blocking Minority?

In Germany, certain critical decisions, such as changes to the constitution or appointments to key democratic institutions, require a two-thirds majority in state parliaments. This provision, which was inspired by lessons from the Nazi era, was designed to prevent any single party from dominating state mechanisms. It ensures that major changes require broad political consensus across multiple parties.

However, a party that controls one-third of parliamentary votes, like the AfD in Thuringia and Brandenburg, can form a blocking minority. This gives them the ability to halt decisions that require a supermajority, effectively stalling appointments to bodies like the Constitutional Court or security agencies, which oversee democracy and the rule of law.

AfD’s Potential Use of Blocking Power

The AfD has made it clear that it intends to wield its blocking minority to maximum effect. Bjoern Hoecke, the radical AfD leader in Thuringia, has openly stated that his party will use this power to disrupt attempts by other political parties to marginalize it. This approach is consistent with the AfD’s broader strategy of using legislative and judicial mechanisms to amplify its influence.

The party has already been accused of using similar tactics to slow down state institutions across Germany, by filing a large number of cases before the Federal Constitutional Court, creating delays and inefficiencies. The AfD argues that it is merely exercising its democratic rights, but critics fear these actions are aimed at delegitimizing the state and creating a perception of dysfunction.

Where Will the Blocking Minority Matter Most?

In Thuringia, the blocking minority will be immediately felt, as a Constitutional Court judge is set to be replaced soon. Without a two-thirds majority, the AfD could prevent the appointment of this judge, creating potential delays in the judicial process. Other significant appointments to the judiciary and security services also require a two-thirds majority, giving the AfD further leverage in the coming years.

By contrast, in Brandenburg, the first significant vacancy on the Constitutional Court will not arise until 2029, limiting the immediate impact of the AfD’s blocking minority in that state.

Wider Consequences for the Judiciary and Public Perception

The consequences of the AfD’s blocking minority could be significant, particularly in Thuringia. With many older judges set to retire in the coming years, the inability to replace them could lead to backlogs in the justice system, affecting everything from criminal cases to divorce proceedings. This potential slowdown could reinforce the perception, especially among AfD supporters, that Germany’s state institutions are ineffective and in need of radical reform.

Though Thuringia represents less than 3% of Germany’s population, any systemic delays could reverberate nationally, influencing voters ahead of the 2025 national elections.

Possible Solutions: Can the Government Intervene?

On a national level, Germany is already taking steps to prevent such scenarios from playing out at the federal level. Recent discussions have focused on amending the constitution to ensure that no party, particularly one with an authoritarian agenda, could paralyze the Federal Constitutional Court.

However, it’s too late to apply these changes in Thuringia and Brandenburg, where the AfD has already gained its blocking minority. As a result, state politicians will likely have to negotiate with the AfD, despite their official stance of not cooperating with the far-right.

Legal experts are also exploring whether the federal government could delegate its own judges to handle cases in Thuringia as an emergency measure, but this is seen as a last resort.

Conclusion: A Test for Germany’s Democracy

The AfD’s ability to wield blocking minorities in Thuringia and Brandenburg presents a serious challenge to Germany’s democratic institutions. While the two-thirds majority rule was designed to safeguard democracy, it is now being used by a party at odds with liberal democratic values. The coming months will reveal how effectively Germany’s political system can manage this growing threat, and whether solutions can be found to prevent institutional gridlock while maintaining democratic integrity.