This master thesis focusses on the issues of sanctioning antidemocratic political parties in the Czech Republic and in the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as the discussion of the expert public in reaction to practice of the Supreme Administrative Court or Federal Constitutional Court. It is a comparative paper, therefore all issues are analysed from the Czech as well as the German point of view and the comparative chapter summarizing main coherences and differences always follows. The thesis is divided into six parts, which aim to map the matters related to banning political parties. Firstly, the theses is focused on the regulation of political parties in the Czech Republic and in the in the Federal Republic of Germany to provide theoretical backgrounds for better understanding of the topic. Consequently, both the introduction into problematic of the concept of defending democracy and the analysis of its demonstration in the constitutional law of the Czech Republic and of the Federal Republic of Germany follow. Moreover, substantive law aspects as well as procedural law aspects of dissolution of political parties are introduced ending up with comparison of both. The thesis contains also detailed insight into Czech case regarding Dělnická strana and in German case the NPD...

À partir de campagnes d’entretiens réalisés auprès d’acteurs publics répondant à la droite radicale en Allemagne et en France, je propose d’expliquer comment les acteurs publics de ces deux Etats participent à la régulation de l’expression du radicalisme de droite. J’ai choisi pour ce faire d’explorer deux pays voisins ayant cadré différemment la place de la lutte contre le radicalisme de droite : les acteurs politiques et administratifs allemands ont construit une politique publique luttant contre le radicalisme politique, ce qui n’est pas le cas de la France où le traitement de la droite radicale se fait avant tout au sein de l’arène politique. L’approche comparée souligne que la gouvernance de la droite radicale par les services de l’Etat fait l’objet d’une construction constante reposant sur une diversité d’acteurs ayant leurs propres cadres de références basés sur des jugements normatifs, des intérêts et expériences institutionnelles. Ce sont les constellations d’acteurs avec différents cadres de référence et la nature de leurs interactions qui permettent d’expliquer les conditions de l’utilisation des instruments de politique publique répondant au radicalisme de droite. Les différences dans la gestion du radicalisme de droite en Allemagne et en France illustrent les rapports que ces sociétés libérales et démocratiques entretiennent avec la politique. / Based on research fieldwork conducted in France and Germany with semi-directed interviews split between different institutional actors responding to right-wing radicalism, this study seeks to explain how public actors have taken part in the regulation of the expression of right-wing radicalism. I thereby chose to compare neighbouring countries, which have framed the struggle against right-wing radicalism differently: German political and state actors have constructed a public policy responding to political radicalism, whereas it has hardly been the case in France where the radical right is primarily handled in the political arena. The comparative approach outlines that the governance of the radical right by state authorities is the object of a continuous political construction undertaken by a variety of actors with distinctive policy frames. These are based on normative judgements, personal interests, and institutional experiences. The constellations of actors with different policy frames and their interactions during the decision-making process enable to explain the modalities of the use of policy instruments that are used to respond to right-wing radicalism. Differences in the handling of right-wing radicalism in France and Germany illustrate the relationships that these liberal and democratic societies have had with politics.