Debate erupted in Germany’s Bundestag on Thursday over Europe’s new asylum system, CEAS.
Interior Minister Alexander Dobrint wants tougher measures to control illegal immigration. One of the topics on the agenda concerns the deportation of migrants to third country centres.
“Balance between humanity and order” is Dobrind’s guiding principle. In other words, the entire burden should not fall on the shoulders of one country, but should be distributed evenly across Europe.
The previous Dublin Regulation was aimed at ensuring fair distribution. According to the rules, refugees must first apply for asylum in the EU member state they enter.
However, in practice, systems do not always work as intended. Deadlines were not met, member states did not cooperate fully, and migrants completely bypassed the process. This resulted in secondary migration and system overload.
Mr. Dobrint: There is no right to choose the country for asylum procedures
Dobrind believes that Europe has the right to asylum, but not the right to choose the country of its choice for asylum, and proposes deporting migrants who have committed criminal offenses to Afghanistan, as well as establishing secondary centers or return points in third countries.
“We are making concrete progress in this regard,” CDU/CSU domestic policy spokesperson Alexander Slom told Euronews.
In addition to repatriation centers, Slom is calling for the creation of new detention standards to make deportation “more feasible.”
“These are people who came to Europe illegally and have no right to protection and no right to stay here,” Slom said. “They should be sent to their home countries or, if that is not possible, to another safe third country.”
“Great idea”, but will it fail with implementation?
Bernd Baumann of the AfD thinks the idea is fundamentally good, but has doubts about the SPD’s ability to implement it.
“This is a great idea and it came from us. We’ve been doing it for years,” Bauman told Euronews at the repatriation center.
“But those who want to do this cannot form a coalition with the SPD,” Bauman said, adding: “It will not go well with the EU either.”
Bauman believes that implementation can only be successful through national policy.
“CEAS will never be effective because anyone can continue to flow across Europe’s borders. Illegal immigration will not be stopped, but will only be redistributed due to ‘forced quotas’,” he told Euronews.
Will human rights be protected?
Green Party lawmaker Claudia Roth said the concept contradicted the principle of asylum enshrined in Germany’s constitution.
“It is really wrong to permanently reduce the criminalization of people on the run,” Ross told Euronews.
Roth also emphasized Germany’s historical responsibility, saying, “No one leaves their homeland without a reason.”
Left Party lawmaker Clara Bunger pointed out that the safety of third countries cannot be guaranteed.
“With the new CEAS reform, most people arriving in the EU in Germany will have no protection here,” Bunger warned. “In the future, the vast majority of people will be sent to detention centers and then to unsafe third countries.”
The left-wing party lawmaker expressed concerns about human rights, saying, “Every human being has human rights, fundamental rights, but they are being taken away,” adding, “They are being deported, they are being put in some kind of detention center, the procedures are becoming more and more undermined, the right to asylum is not recognized, it is virtually non-existent.”
Meanwhile, the SPD remains divided.
“There are many points in the CEAS that point in the right direction. However, we are also concerned about potential human rights violations, especially regarding movement restrictions in secondary facilities and return centers in third countries,” SPD MP Hakan Demir told Euronews.
SPD MPs say that in principle it is legally possible to establish a repatriation center. “But if you ask, ‘Name me a country that would allow this right now and have the legal conditions in place,’ you’ll never get an answer,” DeMille said.
In fact, there have been unsuccessful attempts in the past. It’s not because of the concept itself, but because of the circumstances surrounding it.
Italy, for example, tried to admit migrants to asylum centers in Albania, but the plan ran into legal resistance because the facilities were effectively detention centers. An Italian court later ruled that the project was illegal. However, allowing freedom of movement in Albania would allow rejected asylum seekers to return to the EU via Serbia, invalidating the plan.
British attempts to deport migrants to Rwanda also failed. Again, the return center mentality itself is not the culprit. Initial plans included outsourcing asylum procedures directly to third countries, but British courts rejected this approach.
The Conservative Party then proposed that asylum procedures be handled within the UK instead, but the plan was blocked by Labor and the plan never materialized.
However, the Netherlands chose a more pragmatic path. The Dutch government recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Uganda to establish a repatriation center for rejected asylum seekers. Unlike a detention facility, this facility functions as a lodging facility. This pilot project is currently moving towards final approval and legal clarification in the coming months.
