After Court Decision, Criticism Echoes Loudly: Dobrindt and Merz Face Flak on Border Policies
Controversy Surrounding Dobrindt and Merz from Various Directions
Share on: Facebook Twitter WhatsApp Email Print Copy Link
Following the Berlin Administrative Court's ruling that largely blocked border rejections, Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt and Chancellor Friedrich Merz have been under fire from both critics and their own governing partner. The controversy doesn't seem to abate, not just from the SPD, but also from selected political figures and legal experts.
The decision to maintain border rejections despite the Berlin asylum ruling has drawn sharp criticism for Dobrindt and Merz. Dubious sentiments are not restricted to the SPD. Federal Minister of Justice Stefanie Hubig expressed concerns about the rejection of asylum seekers at the borders after the ruling, deeming them fundamentally questionable. "The Berlin Administrative Court has not yet determined whether border rejections of asylum seekers comply with European law," she told Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland. "Convincing the judiciary that these rejections are lawful won't be easy. The final say lies with the European Court of Justice."
Hubig also emphasized: "In a constitutional state like Germany, the government must adhere to court decisions. Therefore, it's clear: The interim decisions of the Berlin Administrative Court must be respected." She has no reservations that this will happen. The applicants will undergo a procedure in Germany as per the Dublin rules.
Politics: Merz Stands Firm, While Reichinnek Blasts Dobrindt
In response, an SPD politician stated further: "All measures to control irregular migration must align with European law and constitutional law. Our priority is to strengthen the EU's external border protection, which promises success. Additional measures have been agreed upon in the new Common European Asylum System. Our responsibility as the government is to implement GEAS promptly."
The dispute over asylum matters has led to a resignation demand. Dobrindt's approach has been sharply criticized by Reichinnek. "We need legal certainty after the ruling," she told RND. "It is our position that the decision of the Berlin Administrative Court must be taken seriously. Our stance has always been that border actions must abide by European law. The Interior Minister must, along with the legal and interior ministers, review the facts and ensure a legally sound solution."
The German Bar Association is equally forthright. "The Federal Minister of the Interior, as the executive's representative, would be wise to respect the decisions of the Berlin Administrative Court and immediately cease the rejections of those seeking protection," said the chairwoman of the DAV committee on migration law, Gisela Seidler.
Political Expert Sees Dobrindt on the Wrong Path
"Even if the decisions of the Berlin Administrative Court only concern three cases, both the fact that these cases were transferred to the chamber due to their fundamental importance and the detailed reasoning in the 28-page ruling suggest that the court is not focused on individual cases," Seidler explained. "Instead, it meticulously and convincingly explains why rejections of asylum seekers at the border are unlawful, as per the Dublin-III Regulation, which must be adhered to by the executive. The Dublin-III Regulation is in effect, and it must be followed, even if not preferred."
Seidler continued, "Dobrindt should not expect a correction in the main proceedings. The Administrative Court, exceptionally, anticipates the main matter in its decision because the applicants face significant and irreversible hardships. With the entry of the applicants, the legal debate will be resolved in the main matter."
- The controversy over border policies has not been limited to the SPD, as legal experts like Stefanie Hubig, the Federal Minister of Justice, have also voiced concerns about the employment of border rejections despite the Berlin Administrative Court's ruling.
- political expert Gisela Seidler from the German Bar Association criticized Dobrindt's approach, stating that the Berlin Administrative Court's decision, though focusing on three cases, implies a broader issue with border rejections not complying with the Dublin-III Regulation, a regulation that must be followed by the executive.
