Saxony-Anhalt: CDU politicians recommend that the parliamentary group leave the chamber together during the election of the minister-president

CDU politicians in Saxony-Anhalt are considering a coordinated walkout during the election of the minister-president. The parliamentary group would leave the Landtag chamber together rather than cast votes in the first and, if necessary, second round. The idea is meant to block support from CDU members for the AfD candidate, Ulrich Siegmund, while respecting the secret ballot.

The proposal came from Parliamentary Managing Director Stefan Ruland, in consultation with the parliamentary group leadership. Bundestag member Sepp Müller publicly endorsed it. Under the article’s description, a candidate needs a majority of all Landtag members in the first two rounds. CDU members who leave would not participate in those ballots.

The suggestion reverses Ruland’s earlier position. At the end of September, he said the CDU would vote against an AfD candidate in every round and would not leave the chamber. The change followed suspicions that CDU lawmakers had supported AfD candidates in earlier secret elections.

The CDU fears internal support for Ulrich Siegmund because recent secret elections produced unexpectedly strong results for AfD candidates. Tobias Rausch and Hans-Thomas Tillschneider received more votes than their parliamentary groups had announced they would receive. That gap suggested that some lawmakers may have broken with their groups’ stated positions.

The article says CDU members are particularly suspected of voting for the AfD candidates. Because the ballots were secret, no party can directly verify how each legislator voted. This protects lawmakers from personal attacks, but it also makes discipline and accountability difficult. The suspicion therefore remains about possible individual behavior, rather than a publicly proven list of defectors.

The concern matters because Siegmund’s election could depend on only a small number of unexpected votes. The CDU is debating a collective departure to prevent its members from quietly supporting him. Müller stressed that the party’s clear opposition to the AfD had not changed, even as he defended the secret ballot.

A minister-president is the chief political leader of a German federal state, such as Saxony-Anhalt. The position is comparable to a state governor, although Germany’s political system uses parliamentary government. The minister-president heads the state government and represents its political direction.

In this election, the Landtag chooses the person who will lead Saxony-Anhalt’s government. The article focuses on the contest because the AfD plans to nominate Ulrich Siegmund. The CDU is discussing how to ensure that none of its lawmakers secretly helps elect him.

The office therefore matters beyond one parliamentary vote. Whoever wins would become the central figure in the state government. The article does not provide further details about the officeholder’s policy powers or duties. It does establish that the election requires different majority rules across up to three rounds and is planned for mid-December.

Saxony-Anhalt’s minister-president election may involve three voting rounds. The first round is followed by a second if no candidate wins the required support. A third round is available if the first two do not produce a winner.

The threshold changes between the rounds. In the first and second rounds, a candidate must receive votes from a majority of all Landtag members. This is an absolute majority, so the requirement is tied to the full membership of the parliament. In the third round, the candidate needs only a majority of the votes actually cast.

That difference makes participation strategically important. A candidate who fails to reach the full-membership threshold early could have a better chance later, when only votes cast count. The CDU proposal specifically concerns leaving the chamber during the first and, if necessary, second rounds. The article says the AfD has planned the election for mid-December.

If the entire CDU parliamentary group left the chamber, its members would not participate in the ballot. They would neither vote for nor vote against Ulrich Siegmund. The proposal is designed to remove the possibility that a CDU member secretly uses the ballot to support the AfD candidate.

The first two rounds require a majority of all Landtag members, not merely a majority among those present. Therefore, CDU members’ absence would not reduce the number needed for election. Siegmund would still need enough votes to cross the full-membership threshold. The remaining lawmakers would cast the votes available in the chamber.

The exact result would depend on how other groups voted and whether the election reached a third round. In that third round, the rule changes: a majority of votes cast is enough. The article says the CDU proposal applies to the first and second rounds, so it does not specify a walkout for the final round.

Voting against the AfD candidate is an active parliamentary decision. Every CDU member would cast a “no” vote, openly following the group’s declared position, even though the ballot itself remains secret. Leaving the chamber is different: CDU lawmakers would not cast votes at all. Their absence avoids both support and opposition from the group.

The strategic effect also differs. In the first two rounds, a candidate needs a majority of all Landtag members. CDU “no” votes make defeat clearer, while a walkout removes CDU votes from the count but does not lower the required threshold. In a later round, where only votes cast matter, nonparticipation could have a different effect.

The CDU may choose the walkout because it fears secret defections and wants to protect lawmakers from personal attacks. Ruland previously called leaving the chamber a parliamentary discourtesy and favored voting no. His new proposal shows that the party’s strategy has changed.

A secret ballot separates a legislator’s choice from the legislator’s public identity. Members can vote according to their own judgment without colleagues, party leaders, or outsiders seeing their individual ballot. That protection matters when a vote is politically sensitive and could trigger personal attacks.

The article gives a direct example. AfD candidates Tobias Rausch and Hans-Thomas Tillschneider received more votes than their parliamentary groups had announced. Because the elections were secret, observers could identify the unexpected totals but not the individual lawmakers who produced them. CDU members were consequently suspected, but their votes could not be confirmed one by one.

This creates a tension for the CDU. The party wants to maintain the secrecy of voting and protect its members, as Sepp Müller stressed. At the same time, it wants to prevent hidden support for Ulrich Siegmund. The proposed group walkout is an attempt to manage that tension without demanding that lawmakers reveal their ballots.