The Union criticised the Greens’ lawsuit before the Federal Constitutional Court as a sabotage attempt. In the institutional complaint the focus is on the coalition’s plan to have the federal government, rather than the Bundestag, decide which countries will count as “safe origin states” in asylum proceedings.
Parliamentary Geschäftsführer Steffen Bilger (CDU) told the “Rheinische Post” on its Saturday issue that Interior Minister Dobrindt is pushing the migration shift forward and that the Greens are “sabotaging” it wherever they can. He called the Greens’ approach irresponsibly out of touch with reality and added that, whether it concerns migration or the Mercosur deal, “they are reflexively opposed whenever order, security and economic success are at stake”.
Union faction vice‑chair Günter Krings (CDU) said the decisions would not change. He told the “Rheinische Post” that the government protects the right to asylum by allowing safer origin countries to be named more easily and quickly. He argued that this would relieve authorities, speed up procedures and ultimately serve the applicants.
Under the government’s proposal, an executive order would determine which origin states are regarded as safe. States so classified are used to reject asylum applications that appear “patently unfounded” giving applicants only one week to contest the decision. Until now the Bundestag was required to decide on the classification of origin states.
The Greens invoke Article 16a of the Basic Law in their institutional complaint. Paragraph 3 of that article states that, “by law that requires the Bundesrat’s consent, states may be designated in which, based on the legal situation, its application, and the general political circumstances, it appears assured that neither political persecution nor inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment takes place”.
