Ben Knight October 11, 2026 The Left Party is suing two government ministers for accusing them of antisemitism, while Chancellor Friedrich Merz has been sued several times by various parties. Is German politics descending into "lawfare?" The Left Party has sued Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt for allegedly accusing their Berlin candidate, Elif Eralp (above), of antisemitism A verbal slip, an attempted quip, a lawsuit: Things can move fast in the rancorous atmosphere that currently rules German politics.

The brief exchange happened on a political TV talk show shortly after the Berlin election on September 20, won by the socialist Left Party The show's host, Maybrit Illner, quickly corrected herself after accidentally saying of the Left Party's Berlin mayoral candidate, "Elif Eralp says she is an antisemite…. She is tisemite." One of her guests, Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt of the conservative Christian Social Union (CSU), responded immediately: "Na doch"

(or, "well, yes she is"). In the angry fallout, the Left Party's lawyers jumped on these two words, and have filed a lawsuit, arguing that this amounted to defamation of Eralp, as it falsely suggested that the Left Party politician did indeed consider herself antisemitic Not only that, the suit stated, Dobrindt's remark would "undermine her integrity as a political officeholder" and hinder her attempts to form a government in Berlin.

It was not the first time the Left Party has got its lawyers involved following its election victory, as it gets bombarded by accusations of antisemitism from the center right especially over an incident at an election campaign event in Berlin when a rapper chanted "Death to the IDF" — the Israel Defense Forces, or the Israeli army.

Economy Minister Katherina Reiche also angered the socialist party by giving a speech in which she said that the party was now "openly embracing antisemitism." A video of the speech was posted on the Economy Ministry's Instagram account.

Power of the lawsuit The lawsuit has become an increasingly popular weapon in German politics in recent years, usually by deploying sections 185, 186 and 187 of the German Criminal Code which cover offenses including insult, defamation and "intentional defamation," which means knowingly asserting or disseminating untrue facts about others. Theoretically, the punishment can be a fine or up to a year in prison.

In September 2025, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) pressed defamation charges against Chancellor Friedrich Merz after he said that the far-right party's policy of remigration amounted to "ethnic cleansing." Similarly, the Green Party in Berlin brought hate speech charges against Merz last year, when he said "we still have this problem in the cityscape" when describing the presence of immigrants.

In another case, the Green Party 's own Robert Habeck was sued in 2024 by the Alliance for Social Justice and Economic Reason (BSW) for claiming that the new upstart party was "buying votes" on the internet by building up "troll armies." Prosecutors dropped the case after Habeck agreed to pay €12,000 ($13,500) to three charities without admitting any wrongdoing, on the grounds that there was only limited public interest in a criminal procedure. What's behind the rising polarization in German politics?

To view this video , and But charges like these, especially when politicians claim defamation, have little chance of success. "Prosecutors usually dismiss such cases very quickly due to a lack of sufficient grounds for suspicion," media lawyer Christian Solmecke, of the firm WBS Legal, told DW in an "The Federal Constitutional Court has consistently held that, in the political arena, the boundaries of what is permissible are significantly wider than in the private sphere," Solmecke added.

"Anyone who voluntarily enters the political arena must also be prepared to endure sharp, polemical, exaggerated and hurtful criticism." Felix Zimmermann, editor-in-chief of the legal affairs outlet Legal Tribune Online (LTO) agrees, because German law makes a careful distinction between an opinion and a false statement. "'Antisemitic' or 'not antisemitic' is an opinion, especially at the moment, when people have very different definitions of it," Zimmermann told DW.

Lawsuits as PR That hasn't deterred politicians from trying it more and more often. "We are undoubtedly observing a new level of intensity and scale of this practice," said Solmecke. "Political culture has become harsher and more polarized. The threshold for no longer merely engaging political opponents through debate, but instead outright criminalizing them, has dropped dramatically." The danger, Solmecke argues, is that this often amounts to the "misuse" of law enforcement agencies as political instruments.

But lawfare appears to be effective as a political tactic, not least because it's a guaranteed headline. "From the point of view of the parties filing the complaints, they are highly effective as a PR strategy," said Solmecke. "The political benefit arises entirely independently of the legal outcome." Elif Eralp: From daughter of refugees to Berlin mayor?

In the Left Party's case, Zimmermann thinks it certainly pays to show you won't stand to be called antisemitic — not least because Eralp has repeatedly underlined her commitment to the Jewish community in Berlin "I think it's mainly about the fact that the Left Party wants to form a coalition in Berlin and Ms. Eralp wants to become mayor," Zimmermann said. "So of course it's good if you're insulted to challenge it, as a signal." When lawsuits have a constitutional point The motion against Katherina Reiche, on the other hand, may have much better chances — because she chose to post her inflammatory speech on the Economy Ministry's official social media channels.

This could, Zimmermann said, well be seen as a violation of the "principle of neutrality," a constitutional rule that forbids the state from vilifying any particular political party. "That is of course difficult for a politician, because if they say it on their own account they're allowed, but if they say it on the ministry's account they're not allowed," said Zimmermann. "It's a little absurd, because you're effectively splitting one person into two." But even though the Left Party filed the complaint against Reiche as an urgent motion, the Constitutional Court may take several weeks, if not months, to actually decide the case — by which time the coalition negotiations in Berlin may have long since finished and Reiche's speech has had its effect.

The consequences for Reiche, in other words, will be limited — even if her ministry is forced to take down the post and the Left Party can eventually claim a victory.