551 Questions in the Bundestag: Union attacks civil society
"State-funded organizations must maintain their political neutrality," says the Union's request, which taz has received. "Direct or indirect election campaign support" for or against a party is "incompatible." This is precisely what the Union is criticizing on its own behalf. Because, it continues: "The background to this are protests against the CDU in Germany, some of which were organized or supported by non-profit associations or state-funded organizations."
This, according to the Union, raises the question of "the extent to which non-profit associations, which are additionally supported with taxpayers' money, are allowed to engage in party politics without jeopardizing their non-profit status." The inquiry also whispers of an alleged debate about "a shadow structure that indirectly pursues politics with state funds" - with reference to a Welt article that fantasizes about a "German deep state."
The 551 questions to the federal government then meticulously ask for answers about how much state funding various initiatives receive - and where there are indications of "misuse" of this state money "for party political purposes". The questions explicitly ask about funding for the Omas gegen rechts, Correctiv, Campact, attac, the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, Peta, Animal Rights Watch, Foodwatch, Dezernat Zukunft, Deutsche Umwelthilfe, Agora Agra GmbH, Greenpeace, BUND, Netzwerk Recherche, Neue Deutsche Medienmacher and Delta.
Several of these organizations recently called for demonstrations against right-wing extremism after the Union broke a taboo in the Bundestag and also counted on the votes of the AfD for an anti-immigration motion. Hundreds of thousands of people then protested nationwide. Other groups or media such as Correctiv appear to be a thorn in the side of the Union in other ways.
Shortly before the election, CDU politician Mathias Middelberg announced that in future, non-profit organizations that participated in "party political actions" against the Union or Merz would be denied state funding. "Such actions are certainly no longer non-profit and are also not worthy of support from public tax revenue." Middelberg is primarily targeting funding from the federal program "Living Democracy," which is located in the Federal Ministry for Family Affairs. These funding programs will be closely examined "and, if necessary, even eliminated entirely."
The initiatives named in the minor inquiries reacted with horror on Tuesday. Timo Reinfrank, managing director of the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, spoke of an "attempt at intimidation that we firmly reject." Non-profit organizations must and may identify grievances and initiate debates. "That is the task of a critical civil society," Reinfrank told taz. "Anyone who has questions about our work can call us. Democracy thrives on controversy, only then is it alive."
Felix Kolb, co-founder of the campaign organization Campact, to which 24 of the questions on the list refer, also said that the request "fits seamlessly into the Union's recent attempts to intimidate and muzzle civil society." In the request, Kolb accused the Union of a "string of half-truths" that "painted a distorted picture of the legal framework for non-profit organizations." "Non-profit organizations are allowed to influence political decision-making and public opinion and also criticize parties - whether the Union likes it or not."
Noa Neumann from Attac also criticized: "This request shows that the feared major attack on emancipatory civil society under a Merz government has begun." The commitment to social justice and the fight against the far-right are obviously a thorn in the side of the Union. It is trying to "deliberately discredit and thereby weaken" actors in democratic civil society in the run-up to Friedrich Merz's term in office.
The SPD also reacted with irritation to the request. "The Union should not use practices that we know from the AfD," said the recently re-elected MP Helge Lindh to the taz. "The request creates the impression of general suspicion and intimidation of democratically active civil society." Groups like the Omas gegen rechts are above any suspicion of extremism. "The non-profit law can be discussed objectively. But the Union is obviously concerned with groups that they have previously criticized. That is not only unprofessional, it is highly questionable."
Merz had just drawn criticism from the SPD when he declared in a campaign speech shortly before the election that in future he would make politics for a majority of the population that still had "all their marbles" and not for "any green or left-wing nutcases in this world" . Lindh told the taz that this statement now appears in a new light. "It no longer seems like a slip-up, but rather like a concerted approach. And the Union should be very careful not to get involved in an AfD culture war. All the more so if it wants to form a government that has to defend itself against authoritarian attacks on democracy."
Sharp criticism also came from the Greens. "The 551 questions read like a hit list," Sven Giegold, deputy federal chairman of the Greens, told taz. "The CDU and CSU are copying the methods of many right-wing parties internationally in order to intimidate critical civil society."
For years, the AfD has also been attacking non-profit organizations that are committed to fighting right-wing extremism and that also position themselves against the party - sometimes by filing complaints with the tax office . The right-wing extremist network "Ein Prozent" had called for precisely such complaints and had also published a guideline for this.
The traffic light government actually wanted to reform the non-profit law in order to prevent such attacks on associations, but failed, among other things, due to the blockade of the FDP.
taz
