Germany Is Abolishing Itself

Illustrative Image

Written by David Cohnen

The issue of asylum, closely linked to economic migration, and the associated social and financial consequences and tensions have placed an extreme burden on Germany for years.

Paragraph 16a of the Basic Law read as follows until 1993:

“Politically persecuted people enjoy the right to asylum.”

The reason for the abolition of paragraph 16a and the new wording in 1993 was the large flow of refugees to Germany caused by the Yugoslav war. The change in asylum law should help limit the influx of asylum seekers and speed up procedures. The change led to the introduction of the so-called “third country rule”, which means that anyone entering from a Member State of the European Communities or from another third country can no longer rely on paragraph 1 of Article 16a.

This change was a response to increasing asylum applications in Germany and the associated political debates in the 1990s. The new Article 16a stipulated that politically persecuted people continued to have the right to asylum in Germany, but no longer in every case, and introduced the so-called safe third country.

Article 16a was introduced in the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1993. It now reads:

Article 16a GG – Asylum right

(1) Persons who are persecuted for political reasons enjoy the right to asylum.

(2) Paragraph 1 cannot be invoked by anyone entering from a member state of the European Communities or from another third country in which the application of the Agreement on the Status of Refugees and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is guaranteed. The states outside the European Communities to which the requirements of sentence 1 apply are determined by law, which requires the consent of the Bundesrat. In the cases of sentence 1, foreigners can only be expelled on the basis of an expulsion law.

(3) States may be designated by law that requires the approval of the Federal Council in which, based on the legal situation, the application of the law and the general political conditions, it appears to be guaranteed that neither political persecution nor inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment takes place there. It is assumed that this applies to states that are member states of the European Communities or other third countries that are subject to the obligations mentioned in sentence 1 due to the legal situation, the application of the law and the general political situation. In the cases of sentence 1, foreigners can only be expelled in exceptional cases.

This article regulates asylum law in Germany and stipulates that people who are persecuted for political reasons are entitled to asylum. However, paragraph 2 contains an important restriction: people who enter from a safe third country cannot rely on the right to asylum. The exact criteria and definitions for safe third countries are determined by law and require the approval of the Federal Council.

Paragraph 3 also allows certain states to be classified as safe, in which no political persecution or inhumane treatment takes place. Here too, a law and the consent of the Federal Council are required.

According to the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF), the application of Article 16a of the Basic Law has currently resulted in around one percent of asylum seekers receiving protection under this article. However, according to the current status, almost everyone who makes it to Germany can stay in Germany.

Nevertheless, these regulations have not resulted in immigration being curbed on the basis of this section of the Basic Law. The number of “asylum seekers” increased steadily. The increase had several reasons. On the one hand, the extensive appeal procedures played an important role, supported by a large number of lawyers and the legal aid system. This enabled asylum seekers to claim residency rights even after their asylum application was rejected. On the other hand, this increase was also the result of the political will of left-wing populists and the Greens, who advocated granting residence to rejected asylum seekers.

In connection with the continuous increase in the number of “asylum seekers”, the living conditions for unrecognized asylum seekers were also continuously improved, which created incentives for entry into Germany.

In the public debate, Green journalists, members of the Green Party and left-wing altruists, as well as the public broadcasters staffed by the Left-Green Party, often try to mix up the terms “asylum seekers”, “those seeking protection”, “refugees”, and “skilled immigration”. In addition, they promote supposed social enrichment, although the newly introduced paragraph 16A remains largely unnoticed and it seems as if people have forgotten why it was introduced in the first place.” To put it another way, people simply don’t stick to it.

Demands for increased immigration, particularly from the predominantly left-wing press and the public radio and television stations influenced by left-green ideas, were also justified with reference to the Geneva Refugee Convention. However, Article 1(A)(2) of the Geneva Refugee Convention does not explicitly define the individual right to asylum in a particular country. Rather, it sets out the conditions under which a person may be excluded from the protections of the Convention. In Germany, national laws and regulations regulate the right to asylum. Without these national regulations and with exclusive reference to the Geneva Refugee Convention, the chances for asylum seekers to receive asylum in Germany would actually be more difficult or almost impossible.”

What needs to be done to respect the constitution, to grant asylum to those who are entitled to asylum, and to turn away those who are not entitled to asylum? So how can we ensure we comply with the law?

1. Politicians must be asked to observe the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany. The avoidance of clear statements and the distortion of facts must be consistently exposed, particularly by the press and the public radio and television stations. Asylum is asylum and nothing else.
2. The final rejection of all those who do not receive asylum, even after years of legal action, could help information about the high rejection rate among asylum seekers to spread quickly. This could potentially significantly or completely reduce illegal immigration as 99% of asylum seekers would be turned away.
3. Until recognition as a country of asylum, the applicant will only receive benefits in kind during his barracks stays.
4. Work permit: The applicant does not receive any right to work until recognized as an asylum seeker. Violations of this, including by employers, must be punished.
5. Expedited procedures: This may require increasing resources to speed up the processing of applications and make recognition and deportation as quick and tolerable as possible.
6. Improve cooperation: Cooperation between the various authorities at federal and state level as well as between Germany and other EU countries must be improved in order to strengthen coordination in the identification and return of rejected asylum seekers.
7. It is necessary to carry out reform of the litigation process to prevent abuse of the legal system. The deadlines for actions and the criteria for the admissibility of actions must be kept as short as possible in order to be in the interests of the applicants.
8. Efficient return mechanisms: It is important to create efficient and legally compliant mechanisms for the return of rejected asylum seekers. This may include cooperation with countries of origin and transit, providing travel documents.
9. If repatriation is prevented, barracks stays must be carried out until final deportation.
10. Prosecution for identity concealment: If asylum seekers provide false information about their identity or conceal their identity, legal action should be taken.
11. Consider humanitarian aspects: In extreme cases, humanitarian aspects should be taken into account when returning rejected asylum seekers.
12. Education and information: Communication of clear information about the asylum application process and the rights and responsibilities of asylum seekers must be increased.
13. International cooperation: Germany can also work at the international level with other countries and organizations to find common solutions for the return of rejected asylum seekers.
14. If the measures mentioned do not lead to success, namely only in the admission of actual asylum seekers, it could be necessary to change the Basic Law. This could mean that the individual right to asylum has to be restricted or even abolished. However, this does not necessarily mean that it cannot be granted in individual cases.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Capital Socialism: The Great Socio-Economic Experiment
• Germany Quietly Scraps Its $100 billion ‘Defense’ Spending Plan
• German Politicians Criticize Anti-Russian Sanctions