Prohibition of associations and freedom of the press — The Compact ruling of the Federal Administrational Court: What legally interested parties need to know about this and why legal advice is generally essential for your success

What is a club ban? — The legal instrument explained in an understandable way

The Ban on Associations is a Powerful Legal Tool Used by the State: It Is Directed Against Associations of Persons Whose purposes or activities are directed against central values of the Constitution. The basis is Art. 9, paragraph 2, Basic Law In connection with Association Act. Associations that violate constitutional order, human dignity, criminal laws or the idea of international understanding may be banned.

This means that associations or organization-like structures that, for example, openly pursue anti-constitutional goals, can be dissolved by a state decree and their activities prohibited. This is done by authorities, often the Federal Ministry of the Interior, and can have enormous effects on organization, assets and stakeholders.

‍

Recently, the Federal Administrational Court (BVerwG) in Leipzig ruled (file no. BVerwG 6A 4.24). The Court just did not give a general rejection of media bans on association law, even though it does not see compact meeting the requirements for a ban.

Freedom of the Press and Constitution: Meaning and Areas of Protection

Freedom of the press is one of the guarantees of our democracy — it is included in the Basic Law under Article 5 (1) Basic Law enshrined. This provision protects the free reporting and expression of opinion by media bodies, regardless of worldview.

Art. 5 Basic Law Ensures everyone the right to freely express and disseminate their opinion in word, writing and image and to obtain information from generally available sources without hindrance. Freedom of the press is one of the pillars of the rule of law — but: It is not absolutely disputed, but is limited, among other things, in general laws, the protection of young people and the right of personal honor.

Art. 9 Basic Law, as a counterpart, regulates freedom of association, but sets limits on unconstitutional goals and thus makes it possible to ban associations. This therefore requires a complex, often controversial balance between basic democratic freedoms and the protection of the basic democratic order.

The Compact ruling of the Federal Administrative Court: Focus on the legal controversy

In 2024, the Federal Ministry of the Interior banned the far-right magazine “Compact” and the GmbH behind it. Association law was used as a justification: Compact acts as the “central mouthpiece of the right-wing extremist scene” and engages in anti-constitutional agitation — in particular by disseminating misanthropic, anti-migration and anti-democratic content.

The Federal Administrational Court (BVerwG) confirmed on 24.06.2025 (file no. BVerwG 6 A 4.24) that media companies may in principle be banned under association law — a legally controversial aspect and by no means a matter of course in liberal democracies. However, it is not the occasional occurrence of anti-constitutional statements that is decisive, but whether they shape the overall image of an organization.

In the “Compact” case, despite numerous problematic statements, the court did not regard the overall picture as sufficiently “formative” and ruled: The ban is unlawful. However, there was no landmark ruling that generally excludes media from association law. Instead, each individual case must be carefully considered, with particular emphasis on freedom of expression and media.

Accordingly The BVerwG states on this:
‍

The Basic Law also protects opponents of freedom of opinion and freedom of the press by building on the strength of free social discussion. With freedom of association, it relies on the unhindered formation of social groups and on the power of citizen engagement in open political discourse. A ban on associations is therefore only justified in accordance with the principle of proportionality, which guides all state action, if anti-constitutional activities prove to be formative for the association.

After a comprehensive assessment, the (despite a positive finding of the existence of anti-constitutional tendencies) made the statements and activities that could justify a ban Not yet Achieved the required embossing. The Senate came to this conclusion after viewing and evaluating the comprehensive material from the COMPACT media and other documents provided by the defendant. When interpreting statements, the variety of possible expressions had to be taken into account to protect the Plaintiff's freedom of expression.

Many of the statements critical or hostile to migration cited by the defendant as grounds for prohibition can also be understood as sharply formulated criticism of migration policy that is admissible within the framework of basic communication rights. In addition, the legal policy requirement for stricter naturalization criteria and higher integration requirements in nationality law is not per se incompatible with human dignity or the principle of democracy.

‍

For those with no legal experience, this case shows that the legal hurdles for banning associations — for example against supposedly extremist media — are high, but the test can still take surprising turns, as political, media and social influences must always be considered.

‍

Surprising Twists & the Scope of Appeals: Safeguarding Your Rights

The current verdict reveals that even supposedly clear cases can be assessed in court in a completely different way than expected. The overall judgement, subtle nuances in the facts and the high value of press freedom often make the legal situation unclear. First-instance errors can also never be completely ruled out by the courts.

Let's take this example: A ban on associations, a prohibition of journalistic activity, or an allegation of anti-constitutional activities — all of these are drastic measures with significant consequences. But it is just as crucial that government decisions are not sacrosanct. Anyone seeking qualified legal advice in good time can file an appeal, defend themselves against unjustified rulings and take advantage of existing opportunities. Only a legal perspective reveals what options exist in individual cases — through urgent proceedings, main case action and, if necessary, an audit.

Many clients underestimate how crucial details, deadlines and a legally secure approach are for their own success. The appropriate legal strategy often decides whether an initially seemingly “hopeless” situation will still have a positive end. In particular, an experienced lawyer such as Rechtsanwalt Depenbrock from Telgte looking at your case can open up unexpected perspectives and comprehensively secure your rights.

Why you should visit lawyer Depenbrock from Telgte in general

Current Case Law on Association Law and Media Bans Shows: In the Area of Tension between State Order and Individual Civil Liberties, Individual Cases Can Have Enormous Consequences. Legal issues that appear clear at first glance are often full of pitfalls in light of current rulings. Unexpected developments underline the need to rely on sound legal expertise at an early stage.

Attorney Depenbrock from Telgte does not offer advice on the legal matter underlying the judgment, as this is an area of law outside his focus of interest, but this historical judgment should give legal seekers reason to consider in their own individual case whether an unexpected turn of events can occur in their court case and that assistance from an expert in their own proceedings appears - at least advisable - if not even necessary.

Take the initiative:

‍
Use the contact form or call Depenbrock law firm directly. Your rights deserve proactive protection — secure your legal advantage now!

Cover photo: Alex Shuper