The public classification of an association as a “confirmed extremist organization” can have serious consequences. The Administrative Court of Berlin (VG Berlin) has now clarified that such a classification requires particularly significant and compelling factual evidence (VG Berlin, order of April 27, 2026 – 1 L 787/25). The decision is particularly relevant for nonprofit organizations in Germany because being named in the Constitutional Protection Report can have significant implications for their charitable status, fundraising efforts, and public reputation.
Charitable status and association law when an organization is named in the Constitutional Protection Report
The case concerned the inclusion of an association recognized as charitable in the 2024 Constitutional Protection Report as an “extremist” and “confirmed extremist” organization. The association challenged the classification in interim proceedings, arguing that its publication significantly interfered with its freedom of expression, freedom of association, and ability to carry out its activities in practice. In fact, event cancellations, resignations of members, and tax-related risks concerning the organization’s charitable status had already occurred. The court particularly emphasized that being named in the Constitutional Protection Report does not merely serve an informational purpose but also regularly has a stigmatizing effect.
Would you like to receive news like this in your inbox every month? Subscribe to our newsletter “German Nonprofit Update”.
This is particularly significant for associations, foundations, social enterprises, and other nonprofit organizations in Germany. Under Section 51(3) of the German Fiscal Code (AO), the inclusion of an entity in the Constitutional Protection Report may lead the tax authorities to question whether the requirements for charitable status continue to be met. As a result, issues relating to charitable donations, public funding, and grants may also come under scrutiny.
Freedom of expression and constitutional protection: Requirements for classifying an organization as extremist
The central issue in the decision was when an association may be described as “confirmed extremist.” The court made clear that merely expressing political views, even when those views are expressed in harsh, polemical, or provocative terms, is generally not sufficient. Rather, the authorities must be able to rely on sufficiently significant facts that are compelling in both qualitative and quantitative terms. Judicial review is not limited to a mere plausibility assessment. Instead, the factual basis for the classification is subject to full judicial review.
The court’s statements concerning freedom of expression are particularly important. The judges emphasized that even fundamental criticism of a state or its policies does not automatically constitute extremist activity. Rather, there must be specific indications of actively promoting or advocating violence or of corresponding preparatory acts. In the court’s view, the mere approval or relativization of acts of violence is not, by itself, necessarily sufficient to cross the threshold for classifying an organization as a “confirmed extremist” organization.
The court’s high standard for attributing statements made by individual members to an organization is also noteworthy for nonprofit organizations in practice. Individual private posts or statements by former members are not sufficient if they do not shape the organization or if there are otherwise insufficient indications that the association as a whole is oriented in that direction.
A practical example illustrates the point: If an individual association member makes controversial political statements on their private social media profile, this does not automatically mean that those statements can be attributed to the nonprofit organization. What matters is whether the statements influence the organization’s actual management, its articles of association, or its public positioning.
Foundation law, articles of association and liability in cases involving allegations of extremism
The decision also highlights the importance of clear articles of association and careful corporate governance. Nonprofit organizations in Germany should document and structure their communication processes, responsibilities, and publications in a transparent manner. Particularly when dealing with politically sensitive issues, unclear responsibilities or ambiguous public statements can create significant risks.
The proceedings also demonstrate how substantial the practical consequences of a public extremist classification can be, even before a final decision has been issued. Among other factors, the court took into account the risk of losing charitable status, restrictions on the use of public spaces, and impairments to the organization’s ability to participate in public discourse. For this reason, the court prohibited the further dissemination of the challenged classification in the interim proceedings pending a decision on the merits.
Berlin Administrative Court strengthens the rights of associations, foundations and nonprofit organizations
The decision by the Administrative Court of Berlin strengthens the rights of associations, foundations, and other nonprofit organizations. It makes clear that publicly classifying an organization as “confirmed extremist” is permissible only where there is a sound factual basis. Political statements alone are generally insufficient. At the same time, the proceedings demonstrate how quickly such a classification can jeopardize an organization’s charitable status, actual management, financing, and ability to operate effectively in the public sphere.
WINHELLER advises on nonprofit status, association law, foundation law, public funding and more
Our practical tip: Nonprofit organizations should regularly review their articles of association, internal communication policies, and public-facing communications. Organizations operating in socially or politically controversial areas should also seek legal advice at an early stage in order to minimize risks to their charitable status and organizational development.
Is your nonprofit organization politically active, and are you uncertain which public statements remain protected by freedom of expression? Have funding providers, government authorities, or tax authorities already raised questions about your organization’s political positions? Are you concerned that certain publications could affect your organization’s charitable status, articles of association, or actual management?
Our NPO Team will be happy to advise you individually on all matters relating to charitable status, association law, foundation law, public funding, and legally compliant handling of public statements with significant public impact.
