CDU and CSU question non-profit status: NGOs and journalists in the crosshairs

The CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the German Bundestag has caused a stir with a parliamentary inquiry in which the non-profit status of several civil society and journalistic organizations is questioned. Before the federal election, some of the organizations had called for demonstrations against the joint vote of the Union parliamentary group with the AfD for a tightening of migration policy.

"This request is a transparent attempt at intimidation," commented Timo Reinfrank, managing director of the Amadeu Antonio Foundation. Felix Kolb from the campaign organization Campact sees an attempt to "muzzle" civil society.

Protests like this one in Darmstadt before the federal election were directed not only against the AfD, but also against votes in the Bundestag in which the Union faction had accepted a majority with the AfD.

Source: Boris Roessler/dpa

The extent of this document alone shows that it is an extraordinary document: the "minor inquiry" signed by "Friedrich Merz, Alexander Dobrindt and the parliamentary group" two days before the federal election and published on February 24th is 32 pages long and contains 551 individual questions. The CDU and CSU want to know from the federal government whether there is any evidence "that the association Omas gegen rechts Deutschland e. V. is conducting targeted campaigns against certain parties or politicians" or whether Greenpeace is "targetingly discrediting or defaming political opponents". The questions are aimed at a total of 17 non-governmental organizations, associations and non-profit companies.

The exceptionally long list of questions in the minor inquiry is explained by the fact that the questions about the 17 organizations are almost identical. The Union faction asks about the amount of state funding, but also whether they support "political demonstrations or protests with their financial resources" or whether the organizations are, in the opinion of the Federal Government, "misused for party political purposes." Only ten of the 551 individual questions are general and do not target specific organizations.

Small inquiries are one of the most important instruments used by parliamentarians to monitor the government - and to obtain information about events in the government's area of ​​responsibility. For example, parliamentary groups and factions have recently asked for details on crime in Germany, the Federal Minister of the Interior's "sports policy record" or the federal government's funding of "sports facilities in Schleswig-Holstein". The range of possible topics for such inquiries is broad.

The latest minor question from the Union parliamentary group is unusual, however, not only because of its length. It is clear from a large number of the questions that the Federal Government cannot answer at all.

What is explosive is that the Union faction also relates these questions to the non-profit media company Correctiv, the investigative journalists' association Netzwerk Recherche and the journalists' network Neue Deutsche Medienmacher*innen. For example, the faction wants to know: "Do board members or managers of CORRECTIV gGmbH hold political offices or have close ties to political parties?" Without illegal surveillance of the research medium, for example by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the federal government is unlikely to be able to answer this question. The CDU/CSU faction also wants to know when the organizations were last audited by the responsible tax office.

With regard to the research medium Correctiv, the Union faction is even more specific and wants to know how the federal government assesses a Correctiv article that is critical of the CDU "against the background of the neutrality requirement under non-profit law." In response to the minor inquiry, Correctiv itself stated that it had nothing to hide and published its own answers to the questions.

The AfD has doubled in size, and the SPD is now only the third-largest party in the Bundestag. What does this mean for the conference rooms – and what does the memory of a courageous anti-fascist have to do with it?

The fact that the Union faction was even able to submit the minor question in this form is also causing irritation in the Bundestag. Questions are usually drafted in the Bundestag office of a member of parliament and then sent to the Bundestag administration via the parliamentary management of the faction. There, an examination is already carried out to determine whether the question is covered by the parliamentary right to ask questions. If there are any doubts, the administrative staff usually ask further questions or request that the matter be corrected.

A former employee of the former Left Party told the RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland: "The Bundestag administration would never have let us get away with such a request. Not just the extraordinary volume of over 500 questions, but also the content. The administration's employees regularly demand reasons and several factual sources as to why certain questions are being asked and what they have to do with the topic of the request." The Bundestag administration usually rejects questions that do not relate to the federal government's area of ​​responsibility. "It is extremely unusual that the Bundestag administration allows such a request," said the former Left Party employee.

Until the publication of this article, the Bundestag administration did not respond to questions from the RND about the genesis of the minor inquiry.

On our topic page on the 2025 federal election you will find out everything you need to know about the election on February 23rd: Also: current surveys, analyses and opinions on current topics.

The preliminary remarks to the minor inquiry state: "The question of the political neutrality of state-funded organizations is currently causing increasing debate. 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 raises the question "to what extent non-profit associations, which are also funded with taxpayers' money, are allowed to engage in party politics without jeopardizing their non-profit status." State-funded organizations must maintain their political neutrality.

The parliamentary group continues: "The criticism of the influence exerted by non-profit organizations goes beyond individual protests. Some voices see the NGOs as a shadow structure that indirectly pursues politics with state funds." As evidence, the Union parliamentary group cites an article and opinion piece in the newspaper "Welt". The opinion piece speaks of a "deep state" of German non-governmental organizations. The claim that Germany or the USA are secretly controlled by a "deep state" is otherwise widespread among conspiracy ideologists, especially among supporters of the QAnon conspiracy narrative.

The CDU/CSU parliamentary group initially left an RND inquiry unanswered.

Several organisations targeted by the CDU/CSU parliamentary group’s minor inquiry and politicians from other parties expressed their outrage.

"I think it is a dangerous development when the Union questions the non-profit status of established journalistic organizations," said Daniel Drepper. The investigative journalist is head of the research cooperation between NDR, WDR and the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" and chairman of the board of the research network. Drepper added: "In the coming years, we actually need the opposite: a strengthening of non-profit organizations, especially in journalism."

Campact board member Felix Kolb explained: "A string of half-truths creates a distorted picture of the legal framework for non-profit organizations." Non-profit organizations may well influence political decision-making and public opinion and may also criticize political parties.

The Green Party's parliamentary group manager Irene Mihalic accused the Union parliamentary group of using AfD methods. "Instead of setting clear boundaries after Friedrich Merz broke his word, the Union is copying the form and style of the AfD," she told the RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland (RND). "This parliamentary question reveals the Union's authoritarian traits, which have almost been forgotten for a while. It is a disgrace how attempts are being made to put pressure on associations like the Omas gegen rechts and to scare them."

Left Party member of the Bundestag Clara Bünger spoke of an "unprecedented attack on democratic civil society". It is reminiscent of "authoritarian states" and is "extremely worrying given the fact that the Union will in all probability lead the next federal government".