Shortly after Merz took office last month, his interior minister, Alexander Dobrindt, announced he would send several thousand additional police to Germany’s borders to conduct checks, declaring it “a clear signal to the world and to Europe that the policy in Germany has changed.” The announcement angered Germany’s neighbors, with Polish authorities in particular criticizing Merz’s government for creating traffic and inhibiting the movement of people and goods within the Schengen Area.
Following the ruling, Dobrindt challenged the scope of the court’s decision, suggesting it only applied to the three Somali complainants.
“We are sticking to the returns,” he said. “We see that the legal basis is there and will therefore continue to proceed in this way, regardless of this individual case decision.”
Although the binding effect of the decision is limited to the three Somali complainants, the government would be well advised to apply the ruling to similar cases, a court spokesperson told POLITICO. The court’s decision is final and cannot be appealed, the spokesperson also said.
Legal experts have said the German government’s policy is in violation of European law — and some argued the new policy amounted to political theater. Under the so-called Dublin Regulation, European countries are normally obliged to admit asylum applicants to check which member country is responsible for adjudicating their request. That argument was confirmed by the court in Berlin on Monday.
Dobrindt, however, argues that Germany is within its rights to suspend European law based on the need to safeguard internal security and to maintain law and order. Such a move is necessary, he has said, “to counteract excessive demands” asylum-seekers are placing on municipalities.
