Skip to content

Potential expulsion of European Union residents

Contesting Deportation of EU Citizens: Victory in Court for Irish Woman

Berlin's Administrative Court declines eviction once more.
Berlin's Administrative Court declines eviction once more.

Pro-Palestinian Protest Participants in Berlin Avoid Deportation - Irishman Wins Court Battle

Here's a fresh take on the ongoing saga involving European Union (EU) citizens and an American, who were part of pro-Palestinian protests in the heart of Berlin, facing the possibility of being ousted. But the Administrative Court of Berlin has had their back, ruling in their favor twice, preventing their expulsion.

First, on April 10, the court granted an emergency application filed by an Irish EU citizen. Yesterday, another successful emergency application was announced. However, this isn't the final decision - the main proceeding's verdict is still pending. In both cases, the decision of the Berlin Office for Immigration (LEA) is currently on hold.

Previously, the LEA rescinded the EU freedom of movement rights of two Irish EU citizens, a Polish citizen, and an American person due to their participation in pro-Palestinian protests where criminal offenses took place. The authorities claimed that these individuals could potentially jeopardize the public safety of the Federal Republic of Germany, pointing to violent incidents at the Free University of Berlin (FU) in October 2024 as evidence.

In the first emergency application, the Administrative Court perceptively noted that the LEA had overlooked its duty of care in deciding to revoke the EU freedom of movement rights, as it neglected to request the investigation files from the public prosecutor's office.

The other applicants are similarly challenging the decision in the Administrative Court, and the responsibility of different judges will be assigned based on the applicants' last names.

It's essential to note that the high legal threshold for deporting EU citizens necessitates proof of a "real and sufficiently serious threat" to fundamental societal interests[1]. The court's decisions so far do not necessarily indicate that the activities of the Berlin4 participants are not regarded as a sufficient threat, as the specifics of those activities have yet to be evaluated in the main proceedings[2].

In essence, the court's continuous interventions underscore the importance of a judicial assessment before any potential deportation can proceed, signifying the intricate nature of removing EU citizens due to the robust legal protections accorded to them.[1]

Keywords:

  • European Union (EU)
  • Administrative Court
  • Berlin
  • Pro-Palestinian protests
  • Deportation
  • Ireland
  • Departure
  • Free University of Berlin (FU)
  • Immigration Authority

Insights:

  • EU citizens participating in pro-Palestinian protests in Berlin faced threats of deportation based on concerns about their activities potentially posing a public safety risk[1][2].
  • The specific case, known as the "Berlin4," revolves around individuals being ordered to leave Germany, but not being convicted in court[2].
  • The court's focus on conducting a judicial assessment highlights the complexity of deporting EU citizens due to the robust legal protections they are afforded[1].
  1. The Administrative Court of Berlin has twice prevented the deportation of EU citizens involved in pro-Palestinian protests in Berlin, thanks to successful emergency applications filed.
  2. In the first case, the court noted that the Berlin Office for Immigration (LEA) had overlooked its duty of care by not requesting the investigation files from the public prosecutor's office.
  3. The ongoing deportation proceedings of the "Berlin4" participants require proof of a "real and sufficiently serious threat" to fundamental societal interests.
  4. Contrary to initial concerns that the activities of the "Berlin4" participants might jeopardize public safety, the specifics of those activities are yet to be evaluated in the main proceedings.
  5. The fact that the court has been intervening frequently in the deportation proceedings underscores the importance of a thorough judicial assessment before any potential deportation can proceed.

Read also:

Latest