Germany’s second-largest parliamentary party will continue holding meetings in what it describes as a “sardine tin,” after the Federal Constitutional Court rejected the Alternative für Deutschland’s challenge to a Bundestag decision that left it with significantly less space than the smaller Social Democratic Party.
In a unanimous ruling delivered by the court’s Second Senate, judges in Karlsruhe upheld the decision of the Bundestag’s Council of Elders, confirming that the AfD must continue working in the smaller meeting room assigned to it, despite having become the second-largest faction in parliament following the most recent federal elections. The court held that while parliamentary groups are constitutionally guaranteed the ability to function effectively, this does not extend to a right to specific rooms or particular room sizes.
The dispute centres on the Otto-Wels-Saal, the second-largest faction chamber in the Reichstag building. Traditionally, the largest parliamentary groups have been granted access to the largest meeting rooms for internal sessions. After the election, however, the Social Democratic Party—now only the third-largest faction—retained control of the Otto-Wels-Saal following a decision by the Council of Elders.
The AfD challenged that decision in July 2025, arguing that the room allocated to its 151 deputies was unfit for purpose and placed the party at a structural disadvantage. According to the AfD, each lawmaker has only around 1.66 square metres of space, a situation the party said violates workplace safety and fire protection requirements and severely restricts effective parliamentary work.
AfD legal counsel Ulrich Vosgerau argued that the principle of proportionality had historically guided room allocation in the Bundestag and that deviating from it breached the constitutional requirement of equal treatment among parliamentary groups. The party has repeatedly described the arrangement as politically motivated discrimination aimed at sidelining the largest opposition force.
AfD Bundestag member Pierre Lamely last year described the faction chamber as being “packed like sardines,” pointing to the contrast with other parliamentary groups. The party has also highlighted that the SPD enjoys significantly more space per deputy in the larger hall, despite having fewer seats.
The court rejected these arguments. In its ruling, the Second Senate stated that the constitutional status of parliamentary factions guarantees their operational capacity but does not entitle them to particular premises. The judges explicitly dismissed the idea that the Otto-Wels-Saal should function as a “silver medal” automatically awarded to the second-largest faction.
The court further found no evidence that the Council of Elders’ decision was arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable, concluding that the room assigned to the AfD was suitable for its parliamentary work.
The decision was taken unanimously by the Second Senate, including Judge Ann-Katrin Kaufhold, who had been nominated to the court by the SPD.
