Dobrindt Sticks to His Stance After Court Ruling: "We Ain't Backing Down"
- *
- Court ruling upheld by Dobrindt: "We continue to reject"
The Berlin Administrative Court recently ruled that Germany mishandled the rejections of three Somalians—two men and a woman—at the borders. According to the court, these border rejections are generally unlawful and Germany must accept them on its territory, initiate the asylum procedure, and determine the responsible EU member state under the Dublin procedure.
However, the court's decision affects only these three individuals. The court has made it clear that it views border rejections as unlawful in cases where asylum applications aren't filed.
The three Somalians attempted to cross the German border on May 2 and May 3 without filing an asylum application. They were denied entry both times. On May 9, they returned to the border, this time filing an asylum application, but were still rejected due to their past border interactions. The CSU's Alexander Dobrindt believes this decision was appropriate.
The Berlin court emphasized that a Dublin check must be performed, Dobrindt said. "That means the border crossing must take place, and Germany must assess which EU member state is responsible for the asylum process," Dobrindt reiterated. Despite these being interim court rulings, his ministry believes it will "clearly" prevail in the main proceedings.
From May 8 to June 1, a total of 2850 people were denied entry at the borders. Out of these, 179 submitted an asylum application, 138 of which were rejected. The remaining 41 individuals belonged to vulnerable groups. Dobrindt deemed the numbers "still too damn high," and thus, the rejections will continue.
Dobrindt ordered increased border controls and refugee rejections on May 7. This move is not intended to be long-term, and vulnerable groups—such as children and pregnant women—are excluded from these rejections.
- Alexander Dobrindt
- Court Ruling
- Rejection
- CSU
- Border Control
- Germany
- Berlin
- Administrative Court
- Woman
- EU
Enrichment Insights:
- The court's ruling is in line with arguments that border rejections of asylum seekers contravene EU law[1][2][3].
- At least one of the Somalian asylum seekers had valid grounds for asylum, and their rejections without examining their asylum applications were illegal[2][4]. However, these decisions are not final and do not necessarily require changes to the current border policy[3][5].
- In light of the court ruling, the policy-and-legislation surrounding vocational training for asylum seekers could potentially be affected, as it is crucial to ensure equal opportunities and integration for all individuals within the community.
- The politics surrounding the general news of border rejections and asylum applications have proven to be divisive, and the ruling may call for a reevaluation of current policies to ensure compliance with EU law and protection of vulnerable individuals, such as those requiring vocational training for their future livelihoods.
