Judges under threat after ruling against deportation
The administrative court in Berlin issued an urgent ruling that sparked widespread controversy in German asylum policy. The court clarified that the return of asylum seekers from the German border to other countries is illegal if the so-called 'Dublin' procedure is not applied correctly. This decision not only caused a legal uproar but also led to serious threats and defamation against the judges involved.
The case that sparked this crisis seems simple on the surface: two men and a woman from Somalia entered Germany from Poland by train. The German federal police stopped them at the Frankfurt (Oder) station on May 9 and returned them to Poland the same day on the grounds of entering from a "safe third country." However, the Somalis filed a complaint in court and won the case.
The administrative court in Berlin rejected the position of the federal police, considering that this action violates the current law. It clarified that Germany cannot expel asylum seekers directly without the legal application of the Dublin Agreement, even if they entered from a country considered safe.
Following the decision, the judicial circles witnessed a wave of attacks, not only from politicians. The "Deutscher Richterbund" (German Judges' Association) announced that the three judges who issued the decision were subjected to threats and defamation, and emphasized that this development "crossed the line." The statement stressed that criticizing judicial rulings is allowed as part of freedom of expression, but personal attacks on judges are an assault on the rule of law itself.
Legally, the ruling clarified that the authorities did not provide sufficient justification for the existence of an emergency situation that would allow bypassing the Dublin procedures. Therefore, the deportation of asylum seekers is illegal, and they have the right to apply for asylum within Germany.