By Thomas Escritt
BERLIN (Reuters) -A court ruling that Germany could not simply return to Poland three asylum seekers who entered the country in May dealt a blow to the signature migration policy of Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s new government: turning illegal migrants back at the borders.
Here is a closer look at a court case and its consequences:
WHAT HAPPENED?
Police in May sent back to Poland three Somalis who crossed Germany’s eastern border by train and requested asylum. With the help of asylum rights organisation Pro Asyl, they challenged this in a Berlin court. On Monday, a Berlin court issued an emergency injunction saying Germany had broken the law.
Under the European Union’s so-called Dublin rules – hitherto honoured mainly in the breach – refugees can only claim asylum in the first EU country they enter.
The Berlin court said that before sending them back, authorities should have started the “Dublin process” of establishing which country was responsible for assessing their asylum claim, whether or not that was Poland.
Germany only has land borders with other EU countries and Switzerland meaning that, in principle, nobody who arrives by land is eligible for asylum in the country.
WHY IS THE RULING A PROBLEM FOR THE GOVERNMENT
During his election campaign, Merz promised to crack down on migration on his government’s first day in office. Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt, a fellow conservative, announced the policy of returning asylum seekers at the border.
Following the ruling, he said the court’s decision applied only in this particular case, set no precedent, and that the government would continue turning away asylum seekers crossing the land borders.
This is true in a narrow sense: the ruling only applies to the three Somalis and does not bind any other judges. Other judges are bound by the same laws, however, so there is no reason to think they will rule differently.
“The German government will lose every single case on this point, all the way up to the European Union’s court,” migration policy expert Gerald Knaus told Stern magazine.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
While migration is a signature issue for Merz and Dobrindt, their Social Democrat coalition partners are less comfortable with it. Justice Minister Stefanie Hubig said in a tight-lipped statement that “the court’s ruling must be followed”.
Legal experts say that, to be successful, German authorities would have to reject migrants before they enter the country’s territory – something for which they would need neighbouring countries’ cooperation.
But Poland is no less racked by migration debates than Germany. Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s government has just been dealt a heavy blow by Sunday’s election victory of a right-wing candidate for whom reducing the number of migrants was a key topic.
In the short term, it is likely to be difficult to get neighbouring countries, all of which feel more exposed to migration pressure than Germany, to accede to Dobrindt’s demands.
DOES THIS MATTER POLITICALLY?
Perhaps not. The far-right Alternative for Germany was quick off the mark in condemning the “failure” of the new government’s migration policy.
But the next major regional election is almost a year away and overall migration levels, initially driven up by the Syrian civil war and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, have been on a downward trend for several years, independent of any policies adopted by individual EU countries.
(Reporting by Thomas Escritt, Editing by Friederike Heine and Alex Richardson)
