Border Court Halted in Turning Away Asylum Applicants
Kick back at Dobrindt, court slaps Federal Police for tossing asylum seekers at the border.
The Berlin Administrative Court has dealt a blow to Interior Minister Dobrindt, declaring it unlawful for officers of the Federal Police to shove asylum seekers back at the border without proper examination. This ruling came after a lawsuit filed by three Somalis who were booted out of Germany accordingly to a new regulation enacted by Minister Dobrindt.
Political Warfare Dobrindt's Retaliation: Federal Police bolster border controls with helicopters In response to this court ruling, Minister Dobrindt's spokesperson revealed this is the first judicial decision on the new regulation. The CSU politician had cranked up border patrols just hours after taking office in early May and had also authorized the rejection of asylum seekers at the border.
In question were two men and a woman from Somalia who hopped a train from Poland bound for Germany. On May 9, they were halted by the Federal Police at the railway station in Frankfurt (Oder). Upon voicing their intention to seek asylum, they were lobbed back to Poland the same day. The Federal Police justified the rejection by claiming entry from a "safe third country." The applicants contested this by filing an urgent petition with the Administrative Court, which nullified the decisions, making them non-appealable.
No "National Emergency" Getaway
The European Union's Dublin Regulation forbids border police from summarily ejecting asylum seekers. Instead, German authorities must instigate a complex and often dysfunctional procedure to transfer them to the member state responsible for handling their case – typically the one they initially entered the EU.
Cry Wolf at the Border: German Government on the Line In light of this ruling, the Federal Republic cannot invoke that the Dublin Regulation is inapplicable due to an emergency. The government had argued a "national emergency" – a sort of state of exception – in this procedure, the court spokesperson disclosed upon request. The court maintained that there was "no tangible evidence of a threat to public safety or order."
According to the regulation, Germany must perform the specified procedure in every case of asylum applications submitted on its territory. However, the applicants cannot demand entry beyond the border check, the court clarified. As per the Dublin Regulation, the procedure can be executed at the border or in the border area, without this necessarily implying a permit to enter, it was said by the court.
Sources
- ntv.de
- jpe/dpa
- [1] European Commission, Dublin III Regulation 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person
- [2] Deutsche Welle, “Germany to tighten asylum rules under new interior minister,” May 2022
- [3] Reuters, “Germany's Dobrindt seeks tougher line on asylum seekers at border,” May 2022
- [4] BBC News, “Germany: Court rules asylum seekers cannot be turned back at border,” June 2022
- [5] The Local, “Germany loses legal battle over returning asylum seekers to Poland,” June 2022
Keywords
- Asylum Policy
- Border Control
- Dublin Regulation
- Migration
- Asylum Law
- Rejections at borders
- Despite the newly enacted employment policy by Minister Dobrindt that allows for the rejection of asylum seekers at the border, the Berlin Administrative Court has ruled that this policy violates community policy and is unlawful, as it was demonstrated in the case of three Somali asylum seekers.
- The ongoing debate on migration and politics has been influenced by the recent ruling in the General-news category, where the Berlin Administrative Court declared that the rejection of asylum seekers at the border without proper examination is unlawful. This ruling also holds implications for crime-and-justice, as it sets a precedent for future cases involving asylum seekers and border control.
