After the release of the “Institutions and Racism” (INRA) study by the Institute for Social Cohesion, Federal Anti‑Racism Commissioner Natalie Pawlik (SPD) called for action against discrimination within public authorities. She explained to the “Rheinische Post” that the study makes it clear that racism is not limited to hate and violence; it also shows up in unconscious biases and patterns of thinking that shape our everyday interactions. Racism can infiltrate the routines and decision‑making processes of state institutions-administration, police, education and the justice system-thereby influencing public trust, participation and equal opportunity.
Pawlik stressed that those who hold responsibility in these areas must recognise and counter discriminatory mechanisms without casting a blanket suspicion on institutions. “Every form of racism must have no place in private or state institutions” she asserted.
In addition to the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the anti‑racism office will evaluate the study’s findings. Pawlik said, “We will examine the INRA results closely and integrate their insights and recommendations into the updated National Action Plan against Racism, which I coordinate within the federal government”.
The INRA study was unprecedented in its scope: over three years, researchers gained extensive access to state institutions and examined racism in job centres, youth offices, and immigration agencies. The final report found evidence of discriminatory practices across all types of institutions examined. Instances ranged from individual staff attitudes to bureaucratic procedures, discretionary powers, and the handling of complaints. Racism in German authorities rarely manifests in overt hostility; it is embedded in routines, decision spaces, and organisational culture.
On a structural level, the study revealed that gaps in the legal framework facilitate discrimination. The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) currently does not apply to the relationship between authorities and citizens, meaning that those discriminated against by a state institution cannot rely on this central anti‑discrimination law.
