Introduction
On the 6th September 2026, the German political party AfD (Alternative for Germany) celebrated a landslide victory in Saxony-Anhalt. Many commentators have described the result as a turning point in German politics: the first time a far‑right party has taken majority of control of a German state since World War II.
The development signals growing far‑right support across Europe, including in the UK. Lawmakers must now consider the constitutional risks posed by far‑right movements to safeguard British democracy.
The Rise of the Far-Right
The AfD’s victory highlights how far‑right parties have successfully built a positive political presence. The party appealed to local residents facing high unemployment and industrial decline, offering a message of change. In July 2026, 36% of voters reported trusting the AfD, compared with 9% in 2021.
Far‑right parties often promote “welfare‑state nationalism”, arguing that public resources disproportionately benefit foreigners. This creates an “us vs. them” narrative that fuels exclusionary, anti‑immigration nationalism and unifies supporters. Their populist messaging positions them as a voice for “the people”, which is then used to justify attempts to bypass democratic norms.
In doing so, far‑right movements risk undermining the rule of law, a core principle of constitutional law.
The UK’s Constitution
The rule of law is a central pillar of the UK constitution, ensuring that public and private bodies are bound by the law. However, some policy proposals from far‑right parties, including Reform UK, have raised concerns about weakening constitutional safeguards.
Nigel Farage has stated that Reform’s first 100‑day pledges would involve declaring a “national emergency” to pass “necessary legislation”, overhauling the House of Lords and reforming judicial appointments. These proposals would require restructuring Parliament and the courts to accelerate Reform’s legislative agenda.
The House of Lords plays a vital role in scrutinising bills before they become law, while the courts ensure legislation is interpreted lawfully. Both institutions act as essential checks and balances. Reducing their powers risks centralising political authority and undermining separation of powers, another constitutional principle that protects the independence of each branch of government.
These proposals illustrate how constitutional norms could be weakened through executive overreach.
Recommendations
Many academics argue that addressing the constitutional risks posed by far‑right movements requires legal reform.
Far‑right rhetoric often appeals to public dissatisfaction at the expense of factual accuracy, particularly on issues such as migration and climate change. Legislative tools could help limit the spread of misinformation by political actors, especially where it risks inciting hostility or violence.
Despite 77% of UK social media users encountering misinformation presented as political news, UK legislation has done little to restrict false political content. For example, proposed amendments to tackle misinformation in the Elections Act 2022 were rejected.
Local communities may also benefit from measures that strengthen social cohesion and support the integration of migrant groups who are frequently targeted by far‑right media narratives.