Persist at the border's edge: "However, we'll carry it out"
Fresh Spark:
Border BattlesBreaking the law in the name of law and order
The Berlin Administrative Court recently dealt a blow to Germany's border policies. On June 2, 2025, it ruled that turning away three Somali asylum seekers at the German-Polish border in Frankfurt (Oder) violated European and German asylum laws. Yet, despite this legal setback, Chancellor Friedrich Merz and his team seem intent on standing their ground, continuing their tough stance on migration.
In a move surprising to many, both Merz and Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt have declared their intent to persist with the controversial practice of turning away asylum seekers. Debates surrounding the rule of law and the adequate handling of asylum cases have been at the forefront of discussions ever since.
Unlawful Actions
The court's decision emphasized that asylum seekers cannot be rejected outright but must have their claims heard first. However, the federal government appears resolute, with Merz citing the need for maintaining public order and alleviating pressure on local services as justification for continuing with the practice. The German Association of Towns and Municipalities Congress even saw the Chancellor stating that the scope for rejections remains.
The court acknowledged that while their ruling concerned individual cases, it had a broader, fundamental character. The decision was not made by a single judge, but a whole chamber consisting of three professional judges. No main procedure is needed, as the cases of the three plaintiffs have been settled with the interim decision.
Unshakable Policies
The government's stance on this issue is unwavering, leaving many wondering about its commitment to upholding the rule of law. Legal expert Marcel Keienborg explains that such a special rule, which prohibits appeals against decisions, is designed to ensure enforceable deportation threats. Yet, it also makes it impossible for applicants to challenge rejected urgent applications.
Left Bundestag member Clara Bünger has called for Dobrindt's resignation, stating, "Anyone who so blatantly disregards existing law simply does not belong in a government position." Bünger insists that turning a blind eye to the situation at the borders weakens the rule of law and undermines the rights of refugees.
Criticism and Controversy
The police unions and legal experts have expressed concerns about the legal uncertainty faced by border officers due to the government's approach. The ruling not only poses challenges for the German authorities but also raises questions about balancing national security with European asylum obligations.
While the court's decision is final, the government's stance suggests that broader asylum policy may not see significant changes, despite the ruling. The debate surrounding border control and asylum seekers continues to rage on, as both sides grapple with achieving a balance between maintaining law and order and upholding human rights.
- The government's decision to continue turning away asylum seekers, despite the court's ruling, has sparked intense debates in the realm of policy-and-legislation, focusing on the balance between maintaining law and order and upholding human rights.
- The controversial practice of turning away asylum seekers, as advocated by Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt, has brought politics and general-news into a highly contentious intersection, with legal expert Marcel Keienborg raising concerns about the government's commitment to upholding the rule of law.
