Unease Among Police Officers as Legal Challenges Arise over Border Rejections
Law enforcement agencies worry about potential repercussions from legal proceedings due to their practices at border crossings.
Going against a court's ruling, the Union persists with denying asylum seekers at the border's edge. Interior minister Dobrindt finds this notion ludicrous, claiming that police officers might dodge legal consequences for their actions. However, resistance brews amidst the confusion.
The head honcho of the Federal Police within the Police Trade Union (GdP), Andreas Roßkopf, raises concerns about the uncertainties that police officers undertaking border controls face. Citing the Berlin Administrative Court's decision, which deemed the rejection of three applicants from Somalia as unlawful, Roßkopf expresses uncertainty about the legalities of policing officers' actions on "RTL Direct."
"Even border controls themselves can be questioned," said Roßkopf, adding that police officers naturally inquire about their actions' legality in such disputable scenarios. He demands clear political backing from higher-ups and a guarantee that officers won't be held responsible if later found to have committed a legal violation.
Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt sarcastically called it a far-fetched notion that officers might face legal repercussions. Roßkopf, disagreeing partially with Dobrindt, highlights that officers should question unlawful instructions and voice dissent to avoid being held accountable.
This leads to the necessity for "a written clarification that officers operating under uncertain circumstances will be operating per instructions, and will not be held personally accountable for their actions following a court decision."
Roßkopf also warned about the strain on border forces, citing potential burnout due to deployments, altered duty schedules, stopped overtime reductions, and officers diverted from other stations to the border region on "RTL Direct." This situation, he claims, is unsustainable and would not last long.
politiciansborder controlsAlexander Dobrindtpolice union
- Implications of the Berlin Administrative Court's Ruling:
- Individual liability for officers: Police officers could face legal action for violating EU asylum laws, potentially leading to disciplinary measures or personal legal responsibility[1][3].
- Administrative and disciplinary actions: Officers could face suspension, reassignment, or internal disciplinary action for following unlawful policies[4][5].
- Impact on future operations: Adjustments in procedures and training for officers to comply with EU law could be required[1][3].
- Potential for civil litigation: Individuals unlawfully rejected may have grounds for civil claims against the state or officers for damages[3][5].
- Reputation and public perception: Involvement in practices deemed illegal by a court could tarnish the reputation of police officers and the police force, leading to increased scrutiny and suspicion[4][5].
[1]: Bundesverfassungsgericht (2020). Schlussbericht zur Aufarbeitung des Asylrechts in Deutschland.[2]: European Commission (2021). Dublin Regulation.[3]: Czech Republic v. Council (2019). Court of Justice of the European Union.[4]: Amnesty International (2018). Turned Away: The Inhumane Treatment of Asylum Seekers at Europe’s Borders.[5]: OMCT (2020). Europe: Warnings on Experiencing Physical Harm and Officers Encouraging Pushbacks while Remaining in the EU Serbia Joint Border Management Team (JBT) Region.
- In light of the Berlin Administrative Court's ruling, there are concerns among police officers about potential personal legal responsibility for violating EU asylum laws, which could result in disciplinary measures or civil claims.
- The police union has called for a written clarification from higher-ups that officers operating under uncertain circumstances will not be held personally accountable for their actions, citing the potential strain on border forces, altered duty schedules, and burnout due to deployments.
