Persook
Berlin · 26 October 2026 · berliner-zeitung.de

Federal Minister Plans Three Legal Hurdles to Block Berlin Housing Socialisation

Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) unveiled three conditions for a proposed investment-protection law — proof of necessity, market-value compensation, and cash-only payment — designed to block Berlin's plan to socialise around 160,000 rental apartments.

Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) has confirmed the framework of an investment-protection law aimed at preventing Berlin's expected red-green-red coalition from socialising roughly 160,000 privately owned rental apartments. His ministry outlined three proposed hurdles: first, a state government must prove that socialisation is compellingly necessary and that all other housing options — including new construction and subsidies — have been exhausted; second, affected companies must be compensated at full market value, determined by independent appraisal; and third, payment must be made immediately and entirely in cash, ruling out any other form of settlement. The incoming Berlin coalition had budgeted only 16 billion euros for the operation, a figure seen as well below actual market values. Die Linke co-chair Luigi Pantisano sharply criticised the plan, accusing the federal government of prioritising the interests of housing company shareholders over those of tenants, and arguing the law would not survive scrutiny by the Federal Constitutional Court. Caren Lay, Die Linke's housing policy spokesperson in the Bundestag, called Dobrindt's proposal a "legal suicide mission" that would not stop Berlin's socialisation plans. CDU deputy parliamentary group leader Günter Krings backed the initiative, describing the proposals as "sensible and fair" and necessary to protect Germany as an investment location. Constitutional law professor Ulrich Battis warned that the requirement to compensate at full market value carries constitutional risk. He noted that while Article 15 of the Basic Law permits socialisation, it refers to Article 14 for the question of compensation — and it is Article 14 that provides flexibility through a fair balancing of public and private interests, with no explicit requirement for full market value. He considered the other two conditions — immediate cash payment and proof of necessity — more legally defensible.

Watch the full story Read the original

More from this edition