Hesse Calls for Reduction in Benefits for Certain Asylum Seekers
Hesse, a federal state in Germany, is pushing for a reduction in benefits for specific asylum seekers. The demand is based on a planned amendment to the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act in the fall of 2024.
According to the proposed changes, "persons under an enforceable obligation to leave the country" whose asylum applications have been deemed inadmissible by the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) and for whom a legally and practically feasible deportation has been ordered would no longer be entitled to benefits. This applies even if the decision is not yet final.
The prerequisite is that the BAMF informs the respective refugees about the deportation within two weeks, including the assumption of costs, and the consequences of the exclusion of benefits.
Benedikt Kuhn, head of the Wiesbaden State Chancellery (CDU), criticized the situation shortly before the Bundestag election, stating that according to his information, "the BAMF is currently not making such decisions," due to a lack of corresponding instructions from the Federal Ministry of the Interior.
However, Kuhn argued that this is not necessary: "The BAMF is obliged to apply existing law," he explained. This also includes amendments to the law. Applying these amendments in this case would lead to financial relief and also send a signal to limit irregular migration in certain cases.
Calls for Change
Kuhn’s request is part of a broader discussion in Germany about the need to reform the asylum system and reduce the number of unfounded asylum applications. Critics argue that the current system provides too many incentives for people to seek asylum in Germany, even if they have little chance of being granted protection.
Supporters of the changes argue that they would help to deter unfounded asylum applications and free up resources for genuine refugees. They also point out that the proposed changes would not affect those who are genuinely entitled to asylum.
Legal Considerations
The proposed changes to the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act are likely to face legal challenges. Critics argue that they would violate Germany’s obligations under international law, particularly the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning refugees to a country where they face persecution.
However, supporters of the changes argue that they are necessary to ensure the integrity of the asylum system and to prevent it from being abused. They also point out that the proposed changes would still allow asylum seekers to access basic necessities, such as food and shelter.
Conclusion
The debate over the proposed changes to the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act is likely to continue in the coming months. The outcome of this debate will have a significant impact on Germany’s asylum policy and the lives of asylum seekers in the country.
