Border Walls Stand, but at What Legal Cost?
Ready to face the consequences, buddy
Two high-profile members of Germany's ruling party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), have declared their intention to maintain border control measures, despite a recent court ruling that condemns such practices. Markus Söder and Alexander Dobrindt, appearing on separate talk shows on Tuesday night, expressed their views on Sandra Maischberger's show on ARD and Markus Lanz's show on ZDF.
However, the legality of their decision is questionable given recent court rulings. According to an expert, noted lawyer Melanie Amann from "Der Spiegel," the practices being carried out by the government would require a state of emergency, which the government has been reluctant to declare.
Juristically, the matter is simple. In a recent case involving three Somali asylum-seekers, the Administrative Court in Berlin sided with the asylum-seekers, ruling that their rejection at the borders was unlawful. The decision, while applying only to individual cases, contains legal arguments that suggest the current practice of turning back asylum-seekers at the border is illegal.
European law does allow for border controls in exceptional cases, such as when there is a threat to public safety and order. However, the government has been criticized for not providing reasons or evidence to justify these extraordinary actions. Melanie Amann argues that Dobrindt's apparent disregard for providing reasons for his actions is part of a larger strategy aimed at symbolizing a turnaround in refugee policy. She also notes that this approach undermines the rule of law and invites criticism from countries that are also suspected of violating the Dublin Regulations.
The numbers suggest that the situation may not be as dire as Dobrindt and Söder assert. While the number of people seeking asylum in Germany is high, the number of departures has also reached a record high, reducing the overall strain on resources. Despite this, Söder maintains that public security and order are threatened due to the lack of compliance with European law.
The CSU's stance on the issue appears to be inconsistent, with Söder asserting that Germany is in a state of emergency, while Dobrindt has previously stated that the country is not. This inconsistency may lead to confusion among federal police and chaos at the borders, potentially undermining one of the federal government's most important projects.
In conclusion, while the CSU's efforts to maintain border controls may be motivated by political and symbolic concerns, they face legal challenges that may result in future legal consequences. The EU Court of Justice may ultimately have to weigh in on the matter, and the CSU's stance may evolve as the legal landscape becomes more clear.
- The uncertain legality of the CSU's border control measures, as discussed by Melanie Amann, a noted lawyer, suggests that the employment of these practices may conflict with existing policy-and-legislation, particularly in light of recent court rulings.
- The ongoing debate about border controls in Germany, driven by political agendas as seen in the contrasting stances of Markus Söder and Alexander Dobrindt, raises questions about the integrity of the country's employment policy, potentially inviting criticism from both domestic general-news sources and the European Union.
