In a significant legal decision that may have wide-reaching implications for Germany’s border control policies, a German administrative court has ruled that rejecting asylum seekers at the border after they've already entered national territory is unlawful. This ruling, made public on Monday, relates to the case of three Somali nationals—two men and one woman—who were turned away at the Polish-German border despite their attempt to seek asylum within Germany.

The court's decision challenges the actions of German border officials who, under current practices, had returned the individuals to Poland, citing that it was a "safe country" from which they had entered. However, the court found that once individuals are on German soil, even if near the border, they must be allowed to file an asylum request and have it processed according to proper legal procedures under European Union law.

At the heart of the ruling is the interpretation of the European Union's Dublin Regulation, which outlines the criteria for determining which member state is responsible for processing an asylum claim. While the regulation often assigns responsibility to the country of first entry, the court clarified that once asylum seekers are physically present in Germany—even at the border—Germany holds an obligation to at least consider their application before any transfer decisions are made.

This judgment comes at a politically sensitive time for the country. Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s recently elected conservative-led coalition has pledged to take a stricter stance on migration and border control, promising to curb what they describe as unregulated migration flows. Monday’s ruling, however, raises questions about the legality and enforceability of their proposed measures, and could potentially force the administration to reconsider or revise some of its policies.

The Berlin court was careful to emphasize that while the Somali applicants did not have an automatic right to cross into Germany beyond the official border checkpoint, once they were physically on German territory—even if immediately at the border—the government was obligated to process their asylum claims rather than return them summarily. This distinction could set a precedent affecting how border authorities handle future asylum cases.

The Interior Ministry has not yet issued a response to the court’s decision, but legal experts and human rights groups have welcomed the ruling as a reaffirmation of the legal protections afforded to asylum seekers under both German constitutional law and EU regulations. It highlights the tension between political will for tighter borders and the legal frameworks designed to protect vulnerable individuals seeking refuge.
Tools