The relationship between Robert Sesselmann, the first AfD district administrator in Germany, and Angela Schaller, a former leading activist in the neo-Nazi scene, raises a multitude of socio-political and moral questions. This case sheds light not only on the personal entanglement of a public figure but also on the potential consequences for public perception and political integrity.
Background of the Relationship and Public Relevance
Angela Schaller was in the past a prominent actor within the far-right scene, particularly through her activities for the NPD and her support for neo-Nazi networks. We ourselves came across the name Schaller back then whenever it came to right-wing extremist investigations, such as in the case of exposing police officers in Baden-Württemberg who belonged to the Ku Klux Klan.
She lost her job at the Workers’ Welfare Association (AWO) in 2016 after antifascist groups published evidence of her National Socialist ideological activities. As a result, she took a job as a caregiver in a doctor’s office, while continuing to publicly display her neo-Nazi convictions at first. As part of her political activities, Schaller played a central role in the "Thügida" campaign and supported Holocaust denier and far-right activist Ursula Haverbeck. She also appeared at events of the far-right splinter party "Die Rechte" and organized demonstrations in support of Haverbeck. Schaller’s activities also included organizing far-right gatherings such as the so-called "Thing Circle" in southern Thuringia, as well as her role as a press spokesperson at the "Shield & Sword" festival in Ostritz, an event with direct links to right-wing terrorist networks.
Moral and Political Implications
The question of the extent to which a person’s past influences public perception of a political office is complex. The right to personal development and distancing oneself from extremist ideologies is undisputed. Angela Schaller declared in 2019 that she had left her neo-Nazi past behind and no longer maintained connections to previous networks.
However, the openness of the relationship between Sesselmann and Schaller, including joint public appearances, raises doubts about a consistent distancing. The public relevance of this case arises especially from the ideological proximity of the AfD to far-right positions and the potential influence of individuals with extremist backgrounds on political decision-making processes. The AfD is repeatedly criticized for failing to adequately separate its party work from far-right ideologies. Sesselmann’s connection to a former activist of this scene could reinforce fears that extremist networks exert direct or indirect influence on the party’s political mandates.
Legal and Ethical Perspective
In her statement, Schaller refers to the "right to be forgotten" under Article 17 of the GDPR, which allows private individuals to request the deletion of personal data if it is no longer necessary for the original purpose of processing. However, this right is limited in cases of public interest. Since Schaller’s past activities and her connection to a political officeholder are of direct relevance to the public, invoking this right in this context is questionable.
From an ethical perspective, it is important to consider that journalistic reporting on individuals’ pasts always stands in the tension between public interest and privacy. While in-depth research to uncover potentially relevant information can be justified, a differentiated and respectful treatment of personal life choices remains essential.
And Now?
The case of Sesselmann and Schaller raises significant questions about the role of the past and political responsibility. The relationship reveals possible weaknesses in the AfD’s efforts to distance itself from far-right ideologies. At the same time, it remains essential to uphold the principle that distancing from extremist thought must be recognized and respected – but only when such distancing is credible and consistent.
English 
German 
