Berlin’s immigration authorities are moving to deport four young foreign residents on allegations related to participation in protests against Israel’s war on Gaza, an unprecedented move that raises serious concerns over civil liberties in Germany.
The deportation orders, issued under German migration law, were made amid political pressure and over internal objections from the head of the state of Berlin’s immigration agency.
The internal strife arose because three of those targeted for deportation are citizens of European Union member states who normally enjoy freedom of movement between E.U. countries. None of the four has been convicted of any crimes.
“What we’re seeing here is straight out of the far right’s playbook,” said Alexander Gorski, a lawyer representing two of the protesters. “You can see it in the U.S. and Germany, too: Political dissent is silenced by targeting the migration status of protesters.”
If this thread is at all representative of how left-leaning Europeans think, then… uh… y’all are fucked. The proto-fascism here can not result in anything else other than Trump/Orban clones taking power all over Europe. I’m not trying to attack you, but You the People need to do something about this before it’s too late.
People should enjoy the last years of democracy and freedom of movement in Europe, because all of that is about to end soon, even more so now with hostile allies like the United States actively financing the fragmentation of the EU.
That’s life, it may be a consolation to think that at least we had the opportunity to live for a while in a particularly prosperous, free and peaceful historical anomaly. The next generations probably won’t have that luck.
Lot of AfD voters in this thread looks like.
The entire world seems to be turning dystopian
And as usual, the US dials everything up to 11.
Ffs…
With the US going full blown fascist, it seems everyone has forgotten that neoliberalism sews the seeds for fascism, and the EU is more neoliberal and oligarchical than it is socialist and egalitarian.
As long as neoliberals and conservatives continue working to enrich the few, while screwing workers and pointing their fingers at immigrants, the EU will continue shifting right until fascism is absolute.
If you want to save democracy you have to redistribute wealth. It’s the only way to prevent the slip and slide towards fascism.
That just sounds like capitalism
The article is borderline. Because it suggests that the people would ONLY be deported because they protested. But, as it says in the article, they SHOULD be deported because they have committed criminal offences. And criminal offences are not just murders or rapes.
And yes, this is exactly what has been demanded for months: Foreign offenders should be deported more quickly and less ruthlessly. Especially if they come from safe countries. Here, for example, Ireland. The fact that these offences were committed in connection with protests doesn’t provide any protection, and I find it extremely sensational to even begin to compare this with what is happening in the USA.
“As a trans person, the idea of going back to the U.S. right now feels really scary.”
Right, “safe country”.
Did you read the same article?
None of the four has been convicted of any crimes.
Each of the four protesters faces separate allegations from the authorities, all of which are sourced from police files and tied to pro-Palestine actions in Berlin.
The only event that tied the four cases together was the allegation that the protesters participated in the university occupation, which involved property damage, and alleged obstruction of an arrest — a so-called de-arrest aimed at blocking a fellow protesters’ detention. None of the protesters are accused of any particular acts of vandalism or the de-arrest at the university. Instead, the deportation order cites the suspicion that they took part in a coordinated group action. (The Free University told The Intercept it had no knowledge of the deportation orders.)
All four are accused, without evidence, of supporting Hamas, a group Germany has designated as a terrorist organization.
All four have, for the meantime, been ordered to leave Germany by April 21, 2025, or face forcible deportation.
Yes, i have:
Under German migration law, authorities don’t need a criminal conviction to issue a deportation order
The only event that tied the four cases together was the allegation that the protesters participated in the university occupation, which involved property damage, and alleged obstruction of an arrest
Some, but not all, of the allegations would correspond to criminal charges in Germany; almost none of them have been brought before a criminal court.
Two, for example, are accused of calling a police officer “fascist” — insulting an officer, which is a crime. Three are accused of demonstrating with groups chanting slogans like “From the river to the sea, Palestine Will be Free” — which was outlawed last year in Germany — and “free Palestine.” Authorities also claim all four shouted antisemitic or anti-Israel slogans, though none are specified.
Two are accused of grabbing an officers’ or another protesters’ arm in an attempt to stop arrests at the train station sit-in.
None of this sounds to me like 4 people who simply took part peacefully in a protest.
The slogan “From the river to the Sea” was “outlawed” by a decree from the interior ministry designating it as a symbol of Hamas. Think of this act like Trump banning DEI. There is no legal consensus on it and various courts have upheld the slogan to be a legitimate expression und the constitutionally protected freedom of speech in Germany.
This is executive order authoritarian style action and entirely different from democratic proceedings, where the parliament passes a law in accordance with the constitution, which then is interpreted by courts and finally enforced by the executive.
Here the legislative and judiciary are cut out.
Hey Saleh, you’re modding /c/nahost and therefore know about the FU attack, which is the real issue here. This is not about someone shouting “From the river to the sea”, this is about a violent group of Hamas supporters causing 100.000€ of property damage. There is no country in the world that wouldn’t kick out foreigners doing that.
https://www.fu-berlin.de/presse/informationen/fup/2024/fup_24_206-versuchte-besetzung/index.html
You know that occupations of universities have a long history in Germany and are both reveered in hindsight and usually tolerated at their time, like the previous occupation of HU in 2017 for Andrej Holm. https://www.hu-berlin.de/de/pr/nachrichten/archiv/nr1701/nr_170131_00
Back then nobody was threatened with deportation.
This is not normal, also not for Germany. Again there is no specific criminal convictions of the people threatened now.
The only event that tied the four cases together was the allegation that the protesters participated in the university occupation, which involved property damage, and alleged obstruction of an arrest
I highlighted it already. Not sure why you are trying to quote other paragraphs out of context. Here it is again
None of the protesters are accused of any particular acts of vandalism or the de-arrest at the university
Under German migration law, authorities don’t need a criminal conviction to issue a deportation order
Okay clearly you are not even interested whether the students were guilty. The essense of your argument condenses to
“Yes but unlike in America, in Germany this is legal!”
And I fail to see how it makes it any better that Germany is deporting people demonstrating against genocide, simply because you believe it is legal (which it probably is not according to international human rights laws, which Germany is supposed to follow).
I have inserted the sentence again because you apparently only read the last part and had overlooked the part about the building occupation and damage to property.
Okay clearly you are not even interested whether the students were guilty.
You may be surprised, but** I** don’t make the laws.
And I fail to see how it makes it any better that Germany is deporting people demonstrating against genocide
Then you should read the article again. Because almost 50% of the article consists of explaining what these 4 people are accused of and are - apparently - NOT simply protesting.
None of the protesters are accused of any particular acts of vandalism or the de-arrest at the university
But enough other things…
Other people present at the same protest are accused of doing these things. Not these people. Scroll up to the article summary I posted
None of the four has been convicted of any crimes.
you’re really putting the fed in feddit huh?
this is exactly what has been demanded for months
Demanded by whom exactly? And if you say SPD, CxU, and FDP, please look a bit deeper where that demand came from originally.
Demanded by whom exactly
Many people from **all **political spectrum, especially after attacks like the one just before the last general election.
The call for deportations comes from exactly one extreme side of political world views. The fact that a socially and financially(!) disastrous populist bullshit “solution” like deportations seeped so far into the German mainstream is at best worrying.
The call for deportations comes from exactly one extreme side of political world views.
While I agree with you that especially the AfD is keen on deportations in a scale as big as possible, wouldn’t you agree that a system that allows for - please excuse the technical terms - inflow must also have a mechanism of outflow? I.e. deportations in itself are a ‘necessary evil’?
I do think we’d do well to question whether a deportation system makes sense overall. To which I am not going to be able to produce a definitive answer here. But as a society we should absolutely try to look at the negatives that deportations bring with themselves vs. e.g. prison sentences for actual offenders and better social and integration services. Instead, our political discourse has moved toward enabling mass deportations and toward making it impossible to fight deportations.
Also, do remember, that without immigration, all Western societies would be shrinking fast, endangering social systems built on society-wide contribution.
I do think we’d do well to question whether a deportation system makes sense overall.
To regularly question the applied mechanisms in our society is something I’d also agree to. Also, I acknowledge the hardships deportations can impose, hence I think it is a tool that should only be used with consideration and absolutely not in the way e.g. the AfD wants to use it.
I also absolutely agree with you that we are dependent on immigration and also immensely benefit from it. But I also think that in order for something like our immigration system to retain the trust of the people and to function properly, it must have the possibility to be a ‘breathing’ system instead of a one way-only. That means also having the tool to have people leave again. Trying to abolish the rights to hospitality for a host entirely will only see the people flock to those parties that seek to detonate the migration system as a whole.
And I guess we both agree that this would be the worst outcome of all.
We can agree on the final sentence. However, I find it exceedingly unlikely that we’ll arrive anywhere than at a terrible outcome if we continue compromising on both human rights-based asylum as well as on educational/professional migration. The way to remove irrational and inhumane sentiments from political discourse cannot be giving in to irrational demands gradually. The “center of the political spectrum” is not a place to stand on, it’s always shifting position, if you bind yourself to that, so are you. Political positions should instead be derived from scientific observation of reality and should then optimize for good outcomes for the largest number of people.
The article is borderline.
Yes, there is a very apparent spin. There is much emphasis on the facts that “almost none” of the allegations have been brought before a criminal court and no-one of them has been convicted, while only a few lines earlier/later also stating that a conviction is not needed for a deportation under German migration law (but it also isn’t a free-for-all for the state and that proportionality has to be observed!).
Hence, should the state decide to deport them, this is something they would do instead of charging them before court.
Some of the allegations are minor. Two, for example, are accused of calling a police officer “fascist” — insulting an officer, which is a crime.
Well, calling a member of the German state apparatus a “fascist” is not only - for obvious reasons - a very dumb idea but also something I - and especially them - wouldn’t necessarily consider “minor”. Also, it is, despite long existing layman’s opinions, not a crime to insult an officer, but to insult a person. It is as punishable insulting an officer as anybody else.
They should take this to ECJ. If I understand what I read correctly, this is clear treaty violation by Germany. Freedom of movement isn’t some “oh we observe it, when we like it” thing. It is treaty bound obligation by member states who have ratified treaties. Take this all the way to ECJ and have it bonk bundestag and chancellery over the head with clown hammer of “it is pretty stupid you think treaty obligations arent legally binding mwmber state”.
IIRC with EU citizens they have to argue threat to public safety. I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if this thing stops at some district-level Berlin court, Berlin’s courts are way saner than its administration. “Threat to public safety” can be incredibly low-bar or quite high bar, this would be a high bar case. Low bar would be stuff like “you’re unemployed and homeless, go back to your home country and file for welfare there”.
Can’t really bonk the federation for this it plainly doesn’t have the authority to give orders to Berlin’s immigration authorities, this is the state of Berlin doing shit, not the federal government.
Well to EU, the federal government is responsible. If they don’t have authority to intervene on behalf of EU-citizens rights being violated, it in itself would be treaty violation. Member states have duty to police and administer the rights. EU doesn’t care is state federal or not, the singular member state entity is responsible to EU and it is up to member state to domestically organize so that treaties are followed.
The affected people can challenge the decision before court: State courts, federal courts, ultimately the ECJ. For the federation to get involved in the administration of the state of Berlin, Berlin would have to ignore court rulings or such to allow the federation to trigger Article 37 GG, which is actually not too dissimilar to how things work on the EU level. Unlike on the EU level, within Germany that clause has never been triggered: Practically speaking the federal constitutional court would first have to have its authority ignored, and then work out how that article actually works in detail because it’s unspecific AF.
If they really want to deport foreigners they should start with the old-fashioned antisemites that mingle in those protests.
that is part of their supposed reasoning. the four are accused of chanting antisemitic things, but they dont tell u what has allegedly been chanted.
either way, deporting EU citizens who havent been committed of any crimes is very legally dubious.
deportations in general if u ask me, are morally dubious.
dont tell u what has allegedly been chanted
we can guess, yes. but the fact that the claim has not been backed by any criminal proceedings, and they dont even want to say what exactly theyre accused of chanting, is a ridiculous basis for deportation if u ask me.
who havent been committed of any crimes is very legally dubious.
TBF: as the article states, under German law it is not. Whether that is a good idea can surely be debated, but it is legal.
I seem to remember that most of the actions of the Nazis once they got into power were also legal.
Maybe, just maybe, people should have a standard of right and wrong which does not delegate that definition to “legality”, especially people in Germany.
especially people in Germany.
Why Germany especially? So far, every state of injustice declared legal whatever they wanted to do, be it Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Putin,… or even the US, where you once could legally own people.
And of course there is always room for discussion whether things that are legal should be legal. Or illegal. But the chances of that having an effect on those four people here are rather slim.
I was born in a country which was under a Fascist dictatorship.
Not long after, there was a Revolution, the Fascist Regime was overthrown and the country became Democratic.
Still now, half a century later, people in my country of birth remain quite sensitive and easilly alarmed by practices of those in power which are similar to the kind of things that those in power in the Fascist regime would do (for example, things like civil society surveillance).
I expect exactly the same from Germans, maybe just less of it since their Fascist days have been gone for longer and (judging by my own country), people’s alertness to and rejection of things “like what they used to do before” seems to fall the further away from the dictatorship days we are.
Or are you telling me that Germans are special and different from other people and hence it’s wrong to expect them to have a higher tendency than those who never had Fascism to reject practices by those in power now which are similar to those of their very own past Fascist dictatorship?!
PS: That said, maybe a people who has freed itself from Fascism is significantly more sensitive to anything that bares even just a passing ressemblance to what the Fascists use to do, than a people whose Fascism was overthrown by others, in which case I was wrong in expecting Germans to have a natural rejection of Fascist practices. That being so, it would also explain just how easilly the German power elites keep on bit by bit, doing more and more things like they did in the “old days” and most of the population meekly accepts it or even defends and aplauds it.
Still now, half a century later, people in my country of birth remain quite sensitive and easilly alarmed by practices of those in power which are similar to the kind of things that those in power in the Fascist regime would do (for example, things like civil society surveillance).
I expect exactly the same from Germans, maybe just less of it since their Fascist days have been gone for longer
That’s something we also thought for a long time, that we are kind of bulletproof to something like this ever happening again.
The problem/main difference to your country: yes, it’s been longer ago, but also, we had reunification, where two very different places became one and defacto a large population living in a socialist dictatorship for decades had to integrate into fully-running country of the former ‘class enemy’. This rift still isn’t fully closed and it is something you won’t find in most other countries. This lead to a smaller degree of cohesion and a larger portion of people having difficulties to identify with our national architecture.
Furthermore, the people nowadays are way more influenced by the events of the German Partition and its aftermath than the Third Reich. And even there, those that themselves experienced mass surveillance and living in a state of injustice now seem to have no problems expanding surveillance and again oppressing the enemies, as long as it’s not them. In the end, people, irrespective of their nationality, can have a very short memory.
That makes sense.
I stand corrected.
from the article:
Buhlmann explicitly warned that the legal basis for revoking the three EU citizens’ freedom of movement was insufficient — and that deporting them would be unlawful.
Sorry, I read your initial sentence as in ‘deporting someone who hasn’t been convicted of a crime’.
It’s not under EU law. Freedom of movement for EU citizens is a legally binding treaty obligation.
The TFEU has a provision in section 45 that allows member states to limit this freedom, e.g. for security reasons. It will be up to a court to rule whether a sufficient reason was present in these cases, but a state can legally strip you of these rights.
There’s no way calling for an end to a genocide (or even a war) is sufficient reason, and they likely know that. So it is, in fact, illegal.
There’s no way calling for an end to a genocide (or even a war) is sufficient reason
Denying Israel it’s existence can be a sufficient reason. But we both are merely guessing, since we all do not know what actually happened/was said.
Denying Israel it’s existence can be a sufficient reason.
No it’s not what the hell? Or, well, if it then the EU is doomed because that’s not how a democracy is supposed to function.
what antisemites? deporting people is a Nazi tactic so it’s ironic to label this “combatting antisemitism”.
I’m not supporting illegal deportation, but I’m also not supporting true “I really just hate jews because they are jews”-antisemites that unfortunately feel right at home in valid protests against Israel’s actions.
protests are public, those people are gonna show up no matter how progressive the protest.
most antisemites in Germany are pro-Israel, people that go at AfD marches to support their party’s line of Zionism by all means necessary in order to bring about the rapture of Jewish people from the Holy Lands.
I don’t understand, the rapture of the Jewish people by establishing a Zionist ethno state? I think it’s much simpler: The original fascists were antisemites because Jews were the scapegoat that could mobilise the masses due to a hatred for Jews that has been cultivated for centuries in Europe, it was en vogue. The fascist(oid) populists today use Arabs/Muslims (not that the average AfD supporter knows the difference) and therefore show public support with a regime that already shows little mercy for those. And yeah, true neo nazis, islamists and whoever else hate Jews will show up for the protests, and if there really need to be deportations, they should be first.
the deportation of anyone, regardless if they’re a political enemy or not, is a direct pipeline to normalizing fascism.
this is an article exemplifying how fascism always comes for trans people first and you’re here talking bs about islamists. most terrorists in Germany are white Germans.
I haven’t been clear. Yes, deportations are wrong (even though my heart really wants fascists out of the country), and yes, it’s alarming that at least half of the victims are trans/queer.
i agree entirely with you. i think the only way for Germans to get rid of fascism is to start tackling their white supremacist culture.
Zionist ethno state
Jewish people are not an ethnicity. They are defined by religion.Alright then, ethno-religious state; see below.Jews are a classic example of an ethnoreligious group, being Jewish is not solely a question of religion. E.g. many Jews in the US identify as Jewish, but do not believe in Judaism. And religious hardliners in Israel have a very clear image of what kind of people can be real Jews.
protests are public, those people are gonna show up no matter how progressive the protest.
Not necessarily, no. Organizers can publicly distance themselves from unwanted people beforehand and during speeches, as well as check people’s banners and clothing, and that will generally help quite a bit.
most antisemites in Germany are pro-Israel, people that go at AfD marches
I don’t experience it like that. I think the right wing is genuinely split over whether to support a Jewish religiously-defined state or whether to support anything anti-Jewish.
which banners and clothing do you want to be censored? if you mean Free Palestine and from the river to the sea, don’t even bother as you’d be outing yourself as a zionist
Primo job jumping to conclusions. I was naming examples of actions. How organizers implement them is not something I am going to have a say in anyway.
I am saying though that interactions like this are probably unnecessary: https://files.catbox.moe/ssct8w.mp4 If you don’t understand German: The “reporter” is an Afd member who is asking a pro-Palestine protester about the historical Nazis and the protester responds that he likes the number “6 million” [as in 6 million Jews killed during Holocaust]. Also, ftr: I do not endorse using the Jandl quote over the video in this context.
I can’t research this particular incident if all you give out is a video without sources from local media saying whether he experienced repercussions or not.
I don’t get what this is supposed to prove, that anyone can put on a keffiyeh and say Nazi shit?
deleted by creator
Germany seems to be doing due process, so that invalidates the premise that it’s like US where people are sent to El Salvador without any process. Hence the article is garbage.
A court striking down an illegal order after months, maybe years of court processes does change that the victims are put under immense pressure, blocked from pursuing an education or work while in Limbo, unable to travel and on top of that have high legal costs to upfront.
Meanwhile the perpetraitors on the government side face no repercussions even if the courts strike down the order.
It is an effective extrajudicial punishment and the victims can loose years of their life.
Also due process in Germany evaporates into a barely visible steam when it comes to police violence, where even brutal attacks by police officers rarely yield a sentence that would prevent them from continuing working as police.
Germany seems to be doing due process,
Only in the sense that due process in Germany barely exists in this case.
Under German migration law, authorities don’t need a criminal conviction to issue a deportation order
The Intercept is not a trustworthy source for news. What they do is quite simply activism.
On the contrary. TheIntercept is a very credible news souce.
Going to need another source than intercept to believe this story. They have a history of sensationalization or leaving important details out.
Al Jazeera and FT are reporting on it too. But what’s your issue with the Intercept?
No they do not. The Intercept has been incredibly reliable over the past two years.
