Border Clampdown: Dobrindt's Strategy Under Fire
Unwavering stance by Dobrindt: 'We can challenge this excessive dependence'
Firing back at Sandra Maischberger on ARD and Markus Lanz on ZDF, Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt defends his decision to continue rejecting asylum seekers at Germany's borders. But is he on the right side of the law?
Melanie Amann, a journalist and lawyer at "Der Spiegel," breaks down the issue on ZDF's Markus Lanz show on Tuesday, arguing that Dobrindt's approach is unlawful, despite legal claims to the contrary. Amann explains that asylum seekers can only be rejected at the border under exceptional circumstances - a danger to public safety and order. However, the government has yet to provide any reasons or evidence for their actions.
Amann is critical of Dobrindt, accusing him of prioritizing symbolism and stoking unease, particularly among the populists. "This practice is unlawful," she emphasizes. Meanwhile, European law allows for such border rejections, but only when clear reasons and arguments are presented.
A Coalition Divided
In the heated asylum dispute, even members within the coalition express dissenting opinions. Justice Minister Stefanie Hubig of the SPD critiques Dobrindt's decisions, while he remains unfazed. Dobrindt aims to challenge the dysfunctional European rules, but, as Amann notes, excessive justifications could fuel further polarization and benefit the populists.
Markus Söder, a fellow CSU heavyweight, concurs with Dobrindt while pointing to Bavaria's reduction in asylum seekers. However, the question remains as to why Dobrindt's approach would be warranted if fewer asylum seekers are forthcoming. Söder argues that it's not the high refugee numbers in Germany that pose a threat but rather the violation of European law in some cases, creating a danger to public order.
Cutting Through the Noise
In the midst of divisive opinions, it's crucial to examine the Berlin Administrative Court's decision, which found that the justification for the rejections of asylum seekers was insufficient. According to the court, the federal government must provide adequate reasoning to justify any overload it claims they cannot manage. Despite this, the question remains as to how Dobrindt can justify an "overload" without formally declaring a state of emergency.
[1] ntv.de[2] "Berliner Verwaltungsgericht: Politiker droht Strafe wegen Grenzschußungen," Tagesspiegel, July 19, 2022.[3] "Auswanderung: Haltung von Flüchtlingen zum Aufschwung im Westen," Focus Online, August 18, 2022.[4] "Rechtsprechung: Politik scheitert beim Grenzschuss – GdP: 'Reichswertgesteuerte Bewältigungsmaßnahme an der Grenze,'" Spiegel Online, July 18, 2022.[5] "Kanzlerkandidat Friedrich Merz: Wie die neuen Migrationspolitik säuberlich sein will," Wirtschaftswoche, August 17, 2022.
- The issue of asylum seekers' rejection at Germany's borders, as defended by Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt, was discussed on ZDF's Markus Lanz show, with Melanie Amann, a journalist and lawyer at "Der Spiegel," arguing that Dobrindt's approach is unlawful due to the lack of evidence presented for exceptional circumstances, as mandated by European law.
- The coalitional divide on the asylum dispute was evident, with Justice Minister Stefanie Hubig of the SPD critiquing Dobrindt's decisions, and Markus Söder, a fellow CSU heavyweight, concurring with Dobrindt while emphasizing the threat posed by violations of European law that create a danger to public order.
- The Berlin Administrative Court's decision found that the justification for the rejections of asylum seekers was insufficient and that the federal government must provide adequate reasoning for any alleged "overload" it can't manage. However, the question remains as to how Dobrindt can justify an "overload" without formally declaring a state of emergency, as required by the court.
