Reducing the amount of social benefits for those asylum seekers who are legally subject to transfer to another country of the union directly violates pan-European legislation.
Such a precedent-setting ruling was officially handed down by the European Court of Justice. This litigation initially concerned an individual administrative case on the territory of Bavaria; however, the final conclusions of the highest judicial body are of fundamental importance for the entire state system of aid distribution.
The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg has recognized the reduction of material payments for persons seeking asylum in Germany as unlawful under certain legal circumstances. The published judicial decision examines in detail the case of a specific citizen of Afghanistan.
German authorities had previously ordered his deportation to Romania; however, due to logistical and legal difficulties, this decision was never executed. Despite the fact that the ruling was formally issued on a local dispute, it contains precise legal positions of a general nature that are binding on all national courts.
Basic Payments and Benefits Cannot Be Cancelled
In its decision, the European Court of Justice clearly established that any artificial restriction of material assistance provided to an applicant in a similar situation fundamentally contradicts European law. This restriction traditionally extends to in-kind assistance to ensure daily needs for clothing, household items, and essential goods, as well as direct cash payments to cover personal needs.
The court emphasized that it is unlawful to restrict these payments even in those specific cases where the request for protection on the territory of Germany was rejected on the grounds that another state was originally responsible for reviewing the case (so-called Dublin cases).
Pro Asyl Calls the Decision a Serious Blow to the Policy of the Federal Government
The human rights organization Pro Asyl characterized this judicial decision as a serious blow to the current domestic policy of the federal government. According to the organization’s representative for legal policy, Wiebke Judith, Germany has for many years virtually denied asylum seekers the payments due to them by law. Now it has been confirmed at the highest level that such a practice violates European norms. Judith added that this decision is particularly important given that since 2024, even the complete exclusion of financial support has been applied on the ground in similar situations. The ruling of the European Court of Justice has become a clear rejection of the general practice of reducing aid to refugees to a utilitarian level of providing exclusively a sleeping place, bread, and soap.
The European Court of Justice reviewed this high-profile case upon an official request from the Federal Social Court of Germany. According to the materials of the case, the citizen of Afghanistan applied for protection in Germany in September 2021. Initially, he lived in a primary reception center in the Schweinfurt district, where he unhinderedly received the standard benefit in full compliance with the German Asylum Seekers Benefits Act.
The Man Challenged the Reduction of Payments Through Judicial Channels
However, the provision of material assistance was sharply restricted after the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees established the legal responsibility of Romania for reviewing this application and, in October 2021, ordered the man’s deportation to that country no later than April 2022.
Following this, the district administration left the applicant with only in-kind assistance in the form of basic food, accommodation, hygiene products, and emergency medical care, completely halting the issuance of clothing, household goods, and pocket money. The man did not agree with the infringement of his rights and filed a lawsuit.
The European Court of Justice came to the unambiguous conclusion that a decent standard of living within the meaning of European law cannot be ensured without the provision of clothing and minimal funds to cover daily needs.
Clothing belongs to the most basic human needs that guarantee the preservation of human dignity. Cash payments are also necessary in order to guarantee a person a minimum level of independence, including the possibility of independently purchasing travel tickets, maintaining means of communication, and minimal participation in public life. The right to receive such assistance in the host country does not terminate automatically from the moment a deportation order is issued, but is preserved right up to its actual execution.
The Federal Social Court of Germany Has Not Yet Issued a Final Decision
The Federal Social Court of Germany has yet to make its formal decision on this case, but it is now obliged to fully comply with the legal positions of the European Court of Justice. Previously, the Social Court of Würzburg dismissed the lawsuit of the citizen of Afghanistan, siding with the local authorities. However, the Social Court of the State of Bavaria, within the framework of an appeal, fully satisfied the claims, finding no unlawful or evasive behavior on the part of the plaintiff. After that, the district administration filed an appeal on points of law with the Federal Social Court. This instance doubted that the norms of German law complied with European law and sent a request to Luxembourg.
Since March 2022, Romania has officially refused to accept refugees under the Dublin agreements, citing the massive consequences of a macro-regional crisis. For this reason, deportation orders to this country are currently practically impossible to execute, which freezes the legal status of such migrants in Germany.
The current Reception Conditions Directive will be replaced on June 12 in connection with a large-scale reform of the Common European Asylum System. The new rules explicitly allow for the restriction of payments if applicants deliberately stay in a state other than the one that bears legal responsibility for conducting their procedure. Nevertheless, even the new rules require the mandatory preservation of minimum standards for ensuring the applicant in accordance with fundamental human rights.
It is worth noting that the verdict of the European Court of Justice has exposed deep legal contradictions between the national legislation of Germany and the supranational humanitarian obligations of our country. The desire of the authorities and individual politicians in some states of Germany to tighten financial conditions for asylum seekers has run into a tough position of the European authorities regarding the indivisibility of basic human rights.
Despite the upcoming reform of the Common European Asylum System, which will expand the powers of states in the sphere of migration, this judicial precedent establishes the impermissibility of reducing assistance below the level that ensures the social autonomy of the individual.
