AfD politician in Backnang convicted of incitement to hatred!

AfD politician in Backnang convicted of incitement to hatred!

In a sensational verdict on July 23, 2025, the Backnang district court convicted a 63-year-old AfD local politician of incitement to hatred. The politician posted a comment on Facebook that was described as a “medieval pillory.” Despite the seriousness of the allegations, the convict showed no signs of nervousness or concern during the trial, further fueling mixed reactions from the public. According to Stuttgarter Nachrichten this case could be important for the AfD and its public perception.

Another scandal that has shaken the political landscape is the behavior of AfD member of the Bundestag Nicole Höchst. She shared a provocative image that is seen as offensive to Muslims. The post showed a tractor with a manure tank and two men in Arabic costumes, accompanied by a visibly hostile text. After public outcry and interventions by party colleagues such as Tino Chrupalla and Alice Weidel, the post was deleted. Lawyer Chan-jo Jun considers this incident to be a clear violation of Section 130 Paragraph 1 Number 2 of the Criminal Code, as it represents a “malicious disparagement” of a religious group. He argues that deleting the post is not enough to distance oneself from the extremist content within the AfD. In his opinion, a ban procedure could force the party to deal intensively with its extremist core, as Volksverpetzer reports.

The reinterpretation of freedom of expression

But that's not all: Björn Höcke, a prominent face of the AfD, recently supported the convicted YouTuber Aron Pielka, who was convicted of sedition. This shows how the AfD representatives are blurring the boundaries between freedom of expression and criminal hate speech. Höcke described Pielka, who is also known for anti-Semitic statements, as an example of “freedom of expression” in a Facebook post. This raises the question of how the party continues to navigate the fine line between actually legitimate expression and dangerous incitement. According to correctiv.org, the AfD is trying to attack the justice system through such rhetoric.

The problem is exacerbated by the rapid growth of extremist statements in AfD groups, in which violent fantasies against politicians from other parties are discussed. Lawyers warn that abolishing the section on incitement, as demanded by AfD members, could undermine the limits of freedom of expression, which would also jeopardize protection against the glorification of National Socialism. It remains to be seen how the party will respond to ongoing social criticism and whether it will seriously address its political positions.

Finally, it should be noted that the current scandals surrounding the AfD make it clear how complex and multi-layered the debate about freedom of expression and incitement to hatred actually is. This fine line between free speech and criminal behavior could be crucial for the party's political future.