The legal basis for Germany’s continued border controls within the Schengen area is increasingly precarious, with a leading expert predicting their imminent end. Daniel Thym, a renowned authority on asylum law, expressed surprise at the protracted duration of these measures, stating that a single court ruling against the government’s actions shortly after the new administration took office has largely been ignored. The Berlin Administrative Court found the government’s justification – citing overwhelming strain on the nation – to be insufficient, effectively halting the legality of the controls.
Thym’s assessment hinges on the impending implementation of the EU’s new Asylum Procedures Regulation (GEAS) next June. He argues that the current justification for border controls, rooted in the shortcomings of existing European asylum law, will become untenable once GEAS is in effect. “My clear expectation is that border controls will end no later than June 12th of next year” he told “Welt”.
The planned shift towards “Return Hubs” external to the EU, designed to process and deport rejected asylum seekers, adds another layer of complexity and potential political difficulty. Numerous nations, including Uganda, Tunisia and Ethiopia, are reportedly being considered as collaborators in this scheme.
However, Thym cautioned against unrealistic expectations regarding the willingness of these nations to participate. He highlighted the significant challenge of persuading countries like Uganda to accept individuals with no prior connection to their territory, particularly those facing deportation failures and potentially including individuals with criminal records. “It will require compelling diplomatic and, crucially, substantial financial arguments to convince any state to accept such a responsibility” Thym warned, implicitly questioning the feasibility and ethical implications of relying on third-party nations to manage the EU’s asylum processing and deportation burdens. The initiative, while presented as a solution, carries inherent risks of exploitation and raises significant human rights concerns regarding the treatment of vulnerable individuals in potentially unstable or less regulated environments.
