Controversial steps taken to deny asylum applications gain attention
The Berlin Administrative Court made a landmark ruling in June 2025, declaring Germany’s policy of immediate border rejections of asylum seekers, particularly at the German-Polish border, as unlawful under EU law, specifically the Dublin III Regulation.
The court's decision emphasised that asylum requests made on German territory trigger Germany's obligations under Dublin III, requiring full Dublin procedure including personal interviews and procedural safeguards. This ruling explicitly rejected German national provisions that permitted summary rejections, underscoring the supremacy of EU law.
The court notably condemned the practice of blanket refusals based on designating Poland as a "safe third country" without case-by-case examination.
Following this, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) further reinforced these standards by raising the bar for safe country designations. The CJEU made it clear that member states must conduct thorough individual assessments before rejecting asylum claims or applying Dublin transfers. This clarification strengthens the legal framework, limiting summary rejections and pushbacks of asylum seekers, and ensuring respect for procedural rights and protection against refoulement.
Despite these rulings, Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated that the court decision, while a legal constraint, will not halt Germany's broader migration crackdown. The ruling signals ongoing legal tension between Germany’s national migration policies and EU asylum law as the EU Migration and Asylum Pact approaches implementation in 2026.
Jennifer Reich, who can be contacted at j.reich@our website or 0711 66601-183, shared this article titled "Strasbourg and Kehl send border appeal to Merz". To access and save articles, a Staatsanzeiger subscription is required.
The ruling involved three Somalian asylum seekers who had previously sought asylum at the border for the third time. The European Court of Justice could potentially clarify the matter in question. The interim decision is viewed as a "case-by-case decision".
Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) has stated that the legal basis is given, and they will continue to proceed in this manner. The ministry is seeking the main proceedings and will provide a detailed justification. For further justification, the federal government would need a new procedure if they wish to challenge the ruling.
The article titled "Why it is so difficult to deport dangerous foreigners" is related to the topic. Other administrative courts may evaluate the emergency situation differently. The decisions of the Administrative Court of Berlin are final and cannot be changed unless a main proceeding is initiated.
The article is related to the topics of Justice and Dublin Procedure. The Administrative Court of Berlin has ruled that the rejection of asylum seekers is unlawful without first checking, under the Dublin procedure, which EU country is responsible for the procedure. The court's ruling does not see an emergency situation due to a danger to public safety and order, and therefore cannot deviate from EU rules.
The Somalian asylum seekers might not have an interest in initiating a main proceeding. The article titled "Kretschmann and Strobl are in favor of strict border controls" is related to the topic.
Management of the ongoing migration situation remains complex, given the recent court rulings and the looming EU Migration and Asylum Pact in 2026. Policy-and-legislation regarding asylum seekers at the German-Polish border must now comply with EU law, as highlighted by the Administrative Court of Berlin's decision. Politics and general news surrounding this issue indicate ongoing legal tensions between national migration policies and EU asylum law.
