Skip to content
crime-and-justice — Science — General-news — Politics — Health-and-wellness — Medical-conditions

Proposal for a Worker Radiation Safety Directive to be Submitted by Commission Due to Radiation-Related Work Risks

Government's Unilateral Action Failed, According to Haßelmann's Judgment Refusal: Governmental Unilateral Action Unsuccessful

,   and  Administrator
3 min read
Green Party Chairperson Britta Haßelmann Assumes Leadership Role
Green Party Chairperson Britta Haßelmann Assumes Leadership Role

Hit the Brakes: Bundesverwaltungsgericht Hits Back at Government's Border Policies

Get ready for a legal showdown! The Berlin Administrative Court has taken a stand against the German government's controversial border policies, and the stakes are higher than ever.

  • Britta Haßelmann
  • ** Berhaltungsverbot**
  • Bundesregierung
  • Einzelaktion
  • CDU
  • SPD
  • Bundesverwaltungsgericht
  • AFP
  • EU

In a landmark decision, the Berlin Administrative Court barred the border rejection of three Somali asylum seekers, declaring the move unlawful. The ruling challenged the Federal Government's tightened border controls initiated by Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) on May 7.

Haßelmann, a vocal critic of the government's approach, emphasized that every objection and concern voiced was brushed aside by the ruling parties CDU/CSU and SPD.

The interim decision only applies to these three individuals, but the court made it crystal clear that border rejections during such cases are generally unlawful.

Legal experts are abuzz, as the ruling raises several significant issues for asylum policy and the balance of power between government directives and judicial authority.

1. Asylum Seeker's Legal Rights

  • Asylum Application Requirement: The court highlighted that the Dublin Regulation, EU law, and German legislation mandate the examination of every asylum application before any rejections can occur [3][4][5].
  • Dublin Regulation Compliance: Germany must process asylum applications according to the Dublin rules, which emphasize a case-by-case approach [3][5].
  • Security Exception Rejected: The court dismissed the government's argument for an "emergency situation" or threat to public order, as no evidence supported the claim [5].

2. Binding Effect of the Ruling

  • Interim but Far-Reaching Impact: Though the Federal Government claims the rulings are interim, case-specific decisions, legal scholars argue these decisions could have a broader, potentially binding effect, since they address the legality of a general government practice [1].
  • No Room for Appeal: The court's decisions in this context are conclusive and not subject to appeal, though this does not necessarily force the government to alter its broader policy [3][5].

3. Government's Strategic Response

  • Executive Disobedience Concerns: Despite the court's decisions, the government has maintained its stance on stricter border controls and rejections at safe third-country borders. This raises questions about "executive disobedience," where the executive branch disregards judicial rulings [1].
  • Political and Legal Clashes: The government's persistent policy may trigger ongoing legal battles and potential EU-level scrutiny for non-compliance with shared asylum rules [1][3].

The Berlin Administrative Court's verdict necessitates the Bundesregierung's adherence to EU asylum law and the Dublin Regulation, requiring thorough examination of asylum claims at the borders. The government's determination to persevere with its hardline approach in defiance of these rulings raises questions about the rule of law and invites further legal and political confrontations [1][3][5].

  1. The Berlin Administrative Court's ruling on the Somali asylum seekers, setting aside the border rejections, underscores the importance of community law, particularly EU law, in asylum policies, as it reaffirms that every asylum application must be examined before any rejections based on the Dublin Regulation, which emphasizes a case-by-case approach.
  2. In response to the court's valid concerns regarding legal rights of asylum seekers, the government argued for an emergency situation or threat to public order, but the court swiftly dismissed this claim due to lack of supporting evidence, solidifying the significance of adhering to community law in such matters.
  3. The impact of the Berlin Administrative Court's ruling extends beyond the three Somali asylum seekers, as legal experts believe that these decisions, recognizing the general illegality of border rejections, could have a far-reaching and potentially binding effect, challenging the government's hardline approach, and potentially triggering political and legal clashes over adherence to community law in asylum policies.

Read also:

    Related

    Latest