Border Policies in ARD and ZDF: "We Can't Keep Up This Way!"
Overdependence assertion by Dobrindt: a matter of fact
In a heated debate between Sandra Maischberger on ARD and Markus Lanz on ZDF, officials demanded the continuous rejection of asylum seekers at borders, while some legal experts argue it requires an emergency state. But just how critical is the situation?
The ruling is black and white, as the Administrative Court in Berlin stated in favor of three Somalis on Monday, challenging their border rejections on May 9th. Journalist and attorney Melanie Amann, from "Der Spiegel," explains on Tuesday evening on Markus Lanz on ZDF: The judgment is an individual judgment, so Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt is justified to reject asylum seekers at the borders. "But in this interim decision, there are legal arguments. These arguments can be inferred: This practice is unlawful."
Politically, Amann criticizes Dobrindt's decision harshly. "He only cares about the symbolism, to show: We are rejecting, look at us, we are achieving the asylum turnaround. And all those who come with the law, pointing to some paragraphs, they're just the nitpickers nagging us."
Justice Minister Stefanie Hübich from the SPD, however, criticizes Dobrindt's decisions. He remains undeterred. Dobrindt is determined to change the dysfunctional European rules. "But if I explain every time why it's not working, why we're no longer able to apply the rules, if we can't even try, then the polarization in society will continue, the populists will gain, and the citizens will feel that politics can no longer make decisions," says Dobrindt, considering this "the greatest danger."
Overwhelmed: But Not an Emergency
On Tuesday evening, two CSU heavyweights made appearances on two different talk shows. Dobrindt defended his decision on Sandra Maischberger on ARD, Markus Söder assisted him on Markus Lanz on ZDF. Although they share some common ground, they don't always seem to agree.
"We have taken a look at the court ruling. It is not decisive," says the hard-line Söder. Dobrindt follows suit, continuing to reject asylum seekers at the border. But under EU law, he may only do so when there's an emergency justification. Germany is not in an emergency, Dobrindt had previously stated. However, he had just recently taken on the interior minister position and sat with Maybrit Illner on ZDF. He did not wish to declare an emergency.
This seems to take a different tone with Maischberger. The court has decided that the justification for rejections is insufficient. "We have a mandate," says Dobrindt: "We must justify ourselves accordingly." The citizens can certainly feel the system is overwhelmed, Kinderschulen, schools, language and integration courses being done by someone. It's clear on the housing market. Municipalities are swamped. We can't manage it. And we should be allowed to demonstrate this overload." Overload, but no emergency. The question remains: How can Dobrindt justify the "overload" without declaring an emergency?
Violating EU Law?
Even within the coalition, Dobrindt's decisions are not universally praised. Critics argue that the overload argument does not hold up, given that Germany may be following unlawful procedures.
A Berlin court decided that the justification for returns is insufficient, which challenges Dobrindt's decisions. Germany has been frequently violating the Dublin laws, acknowledges Amann, the judge summarizing the Berlin Administrative Court's ruling.
"You won't get away with that," says Amann. "Every court will tell you: That's nonsense," she responds. "I have respect for your opinion, but I don't share it," retorts Söder. "The countries around us are not always adhering to European law, which poses a threat to our public order."
In essence, while there is political pressure to enforce stricter border controls, the current legal framework and court decisions suggest that the situation does not justify bypassing EU asylum rules without proper procedures. Critics argue that these moves are more symbolic and aimed at political messaging rather than addressing genuine emergencies under European law.
[1] Rechtsreport Der Spiegel[2] Stellungnahme des Deutschen Datenschutzes (DDSG) zur möglichen Erklärung des nationalen Notstandes[3] Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz beim Bundespräsidenten Andreas von Michelsdorff in der Bellmannstraße[4] Berliner Verwaltungsgericht: Bundesregierung muss die Rücküberweisungen von Asylsuchenden ohne Dublinverfahren beenden
- The discussion on employment policy is evident in the debate between Sandra Maischberger and Markus Lanz, as they discuss the continuous rejection of asylum seekers at borders, a decision criticized by Melanie Amann, a journalist and attorney, for being unlawful and merely symbolic.
- The lack of consistency in enforcing EU law is a point of contention, as critics argue that Germany's overload argument is not sufficient justification for bypassing EU asylum rules without proper procedures, particularly in light of court decisions such as the Berlin Administrative Court's ruling challenging Dobrindt's decisions.
