Federal police restrict asylum procedure: Who is left out?

Federal police restrict asylum procedure: Who is left out?

On May 10, 2025, the Federal Police tightened its rejection practice at German borders. This decision applies in particular to asylum and protection seekers. According to the new regulations, these people are rejected in most cases, unless they are pregnant women, sick people or unaccompanied minors. These requirements are binding for the federal police officers based on a instruction from the Federal Minister of the Interior.

Andreas Roßkopf, the chairman of the police union (GdP) for the federal police, commented on the new regulations. He emphasizes that the responsibility for these measures is clearly due to the Federal Ministry of the Interior. Heiko Teggatz, a representative of the German Police Union (DPolG), confirms that such rejections are now the rule and are not applied only in special circumstances.

legal context of rejections

The federal police carry out these rejections until a judicial decision is made. This strategy is in contrast to the statements of Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who describes the course of controls in similarity to those during the European Football Championship. No asylum seekers were rejected during this time because this would have violated EU law. Such measures and their legal foundations raise questions about how they cover the German asylum law, which is anchored in Article 16a of the Basic Law.

Asylum law in Germany protects human dignity, life and basic human rights. Politically persecuted persons who would be suspended to return to their country of origin to their country of origin can be entitled to asylum. This also includes persecution due to their breed, nationality, political beliefs or religion. However, the specific conditions for the recognition of asylum permissions are already excluding entry from secure third countries, which include all EU member states as well as Norway and Switzerland.

episodes for refugees and asylum seekers

The rejections that have now been introduced have far -reaching effects. There are considerable concerns that asylum seekers who are not among the special groups in need may not receive the help required in Germany. Teggatz emphasizes that liability for police action also lies with the Ministry. A fear of further tightening of asylum practice will be loud, without taking into account the individual circumstances of those affected.

In addition, it is important to note that emergency situations such as poverty or war in the countries of origin are not automatically recognized as reasons for granting asylum. The confusion and uncertainty that causes these new rules could further tighten the already tense situation for many affected people. The future handling of these new guidelines will face new challenges for both the people concerned and the police officers.