The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights leaves little room for rejection

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the expedited deportation of a Syrian national to Greece is unlawful. This ruling is also linked to the ongoing asylum debate in Germany.

When Haitham T. arrived. To the Austrian-German border in September 2018, he was stopped by the federal police. The Syrian wanted to go to Germany, where his brother has lived for several years. Officers questioned him and offered him a lawyer and a phone call. At first the lawyer refused and no one returned his call. Those were essentially his only experiences in Germany. Because after only a few hours, Haitham T.'s residence was… It's already over. The authorities put him on a plane heading to Greece, where he first set foot in the European Union. “I was shocked,” says the 31-year-old.

The so-called “Seehofer deal” was behind this return trip within a few hours. Then-Federal Interior Minister Horst Seehofer had already put the issue of refugee rejection on his agenda in 2018. Content of the agreement: Refugees arrested by the federal police must be returned to Greece within 48 hours without asylum procedures.

Seehofer wanted to circumvent Dublin rules

The EU's Dublin rules in effect stipulate that at least one examination should take place in Germany if a refugee applies for asylum at the German border. Seehofer wanted to get around that. However, in administrative court proceedings in subsequent years, deportations to Greece based on this deal were found to be illegal. It was reversed and the people were sent back to Germany.

Syrian Haitham T., who was flown to Greece in September 2018 as a result of the deal, was not so lucky. He was imprisoned on the island of Leros, and was sometimes threatened with transfer to Türkiye. Only later, with the support of Greek refugee assistants, was he granted refugee status due to mental illness. With this status, he can then return to Germany. Today he lives in the Dortmund area with his brother.

See the European Court of Human Rights Human rights violation

However, Haitham T. She filed a lawsuit against his deportation in 2018 before the European Court of Human Rights. The court in Strasbourg now agreed with him. According to the ruling, deportation to Greece constitutes a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the case of Haitham T., the German and Greek authorities violated the prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment.

Germany did not have to deport Haitham T. At that time there was a risk that he would not receive proper asylum procedures in Greece. The Seehofer Agreement did not include any guarantees for effective asylum procedures in Greece. There was a risk that the Syrian would be unjustly deported from Greece to other countries. In the end, he may have ended up in Syria. This violates the European Convention on Human Rights.

Germany was also unable to guarantee that the man would not be imprisoned in Greece under conditions that violated his human rights. The European Court of Human Rights has often criticized the conditions in Greek immigration detention.

The ruling is relevant to the current asylum debate

Although the ruling only assesses the specific individual situation as of 2018, it is also relevant to the ongoing asylum debate. Konstantin Hrushka, a law professor at the Evangelical University of Freiburg, says the decision should be understood to mean that unilateral rejection at the border also violates the European Convention on Human Rights.

Such rejections have been discussed repeatedly for weeks, and have already been demanded by the CDU. According to experts, European law also contradicts this, but according to the ruling issued now, the Human Rights Convention is another legal counterargument, according to Hruska. “Rejection is possible only if the refugee is handed over to the authorities,” says the asylum law expert. Therefore simply sending them away is not allowed.

But such rejection and surrender does not always work. The European Convention on Human Rights allows this only if appropriate asylum procedures are guaranteed in the rejected destination country. This can be ensured through agreements such as those already in place with many neighboring countries and member states.

Chain relay It must be excluded

But there is a problem: even if the agreement guarantees an orderly procedure, this must also be consistent with practice, Hruska explains. If the federal police want to return someone, they must not have any indication that the refugee will be subject to serial deportation and eventually end up in their home country. Anything else would be inconsistent with the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights.

Hrushka believes that the current plans of the Polish and Dutch governments to temporarily suspend the right to asylum make it impossible to reject asylum applications in these countries. Regular asylum procedures are no longer guaranteed.

Human rights organizations Welcome to the ruling

The NGO PRO ASYL welcomes the Strasbourg ruling. “Germany is obligated to uphold human rights standards and ensure access to constitutional asylum procedures even at the German border,” said Tarek Al-Alawi of PRO ASYL, in cooperation with partner associations such as the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR). ,, Submitted with a statement in court proceedings.

The plaintiff is entitled to compensation

In the case of Haitham T., the German authorities should have checked in advance whether asylum procedures were guaranteed in Greece. According to the European Court of Human Rights, this was not the case in 2018.

For the 31-year-old, the ruling is a belated satisfaction. “There is still justice,” he added. ARD's legal editorial team. The violations of his rights were so serious at the time that Haitham T. He now gets compensation. Strasbourg judges ordered Germany to pay 8,000 euros and Greece to pay 6,500 euros.

File No. 13337/19 (HT/Germany and Greece)