What does a human being need to survive with dignity while waiting for asylum and being transferred from one European country to another?
That was the question facing judges at the European Court of Justice (ECJ) as they ruled on whether the benefits provided by Germany fell short of EU expectations.
The ECJ was asked to interpret the rights of an Afghan asylum-seeker, identified as FB, whose asylum application was rejected by Germany and who was to be deported to Romania, where he first claimed asylum, in 2021.
While FB awaited transfer, he was provided food, warm shelter, and sanitation and health care, but received no assistance with clothing and other household items. A law in Germany reduced benefits for rejected asylum seekers, which activists described as “bed, bread and soap”.
FB sued the Bavarian district of Schweinfurt over benefits cuts in 2022, but the case ultimately ended up in the ECJ.
On Thursday the court ruled in favor of a rejected asylum seeker, saying basic necessities such as clothing and household items cannot be taken away even if an asylum application is rejected.
The Court stated that clothing is one of the “most basic needs”, and cash benefits for daily necessities such as travel tickets and communication devices ensure “a minimum level of participation in the social and cultural life” of the Member State in which a person lives. This allowance “contributes to ensuring the subsistence of the applicant and protecting the physical and mental health of the applicant.”
Activists welcomed the decision and expected it to have wider implications for the EU. But a new migration deal makes things unclear.
Germany restricts asylum benefits in 2024
FB applied for asylum in Germany in 2021. A year later, his application was deemed “inadmissible”.
EU migration policy is governed by the Dublin Regulation, under which an application for asylum is considered inadmissible when another participating state has already taken or designated responsibility for the claim.
The aim is to discourage secondary movement and prevent asylum seekers from coming to certain countries, and instead distribute them throughout the bloc.
Migration has become a top political issue in Germany over the past decade, used as a major talking point by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) to garner electoral support. In an effort to win back voters, the elected German government has come under pressure to reduce benefits for asylum seekers.
Under amendments to the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act in 2024, Germany will allow food, accommodation and health care to be provided but reduce the provision of cash.
“In practice, this could mean no or very little cash,” Wiebke Judith, policy and advocacy officer at Pro Asylum, a German NGO that works for human rights and refugee protection in Europe, told DW.
Activists claimed that the lack of clothing and cash deprives an adequate standard of living and therefore violates the spirit of the EU’s Reception Conditions Directive, which sets minimum standards for assistance to asylum applicants across the bloc, including those rejected.
Germany’s asylum seeker benefits act “eliminates the socio-cultural component of the subsistence minimum,” Pro Asylum said in a statement. But the court’s decision “categorically rejects this cut in benefits,” it said.
The ECJ ruling indicates that rejected asylum seekers should also have access to the necessary support until their transfer actually takes place.
AfD takes advantage of ‘liberal welfare’ benefits
Far-right and even some conservative politicians in Europe have objected to “generous welfare” benefits for asylum seekers, citing them as a factor in attracting migrants to Europe from non-EU countries.
The AfD in Germany has said migrants keep cash aid or send it to families back home. The far-right party also claimed credit when the German government introduced a debit card with a fixed amount for purchases instead of cash in 2024.
But activists have said such restrictions would not deter immigrants but would instead force them to become part of the informal economy. Judith had previously said that those fleeing war and persecution would not be stopped by a lack of benefits.
As the EU’s new migration deal comes into force, will the relief be short-lived?
Thursday’s decision provides EU-wide guidance for national authorities on the treatment of asylum seekers during transfer procedures, strengthening the protection of fundamental rights during the asylum process.
And yet there are concerns that a victory in the ECJ will mean little on June 12, when the new EU migration deal comes into force.
“This won’t help for very long,” Gerard Sadiq, an asylum manager at La Cimède, a French NGO that provides legal assistance to asylum seekers, told DW. The new migration agreement “offers little benefit,” he said,
The new rules from June 12 say member states can reduce or withdraw daily allowances “and other benefits” for applicants who are required to be present in another member state, Swedish political scientist Bernd Parusel told DW.
“At the same time, they still need to be ensured a standard of living in accordance with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights and international obligations,” he said.
Pro Assail’s Judith was more optimistic and pleased with the court’s direction. He said, “The court’s judgment reveals a direction of travel that considers personal gain as essential to a dignified life.”
Edited by: Martin Kuebler