Federal Constitutional Court stops money cuts for asylum seekers

Karlsruhe stops across-the-board reductions in benefits and at the same time makes it clear: the legislator can certainly demand that migrants work in order to be less in need of help.

In Germany, asylum seekers in collective accommodation receive less money than those in their own apartment. This is unconstitutional, according to a decision from Karlsruhe.

Francesca Agosta / Tipress / Keystone

Kamalraj G. was born in Sri Lanka in 1982 and came to Germany in 2014 as an asylum seeker. To this day he lives in collective accommodation near Düsseldorf, sharing a room with one person and a kitchen and bathroom with seven people. In such cases, it would be possible to cook and do business together at low cost, the legislator assumed, and in 2019 it was stipulated in the law that asylum seekers in collective accommodation receive less money than those who live independently. You receive 330 euros instead of 367 euros per month. The Federal Constitutional Court has now declared this regulation to be unconstitutional. The “special needs level” introduced on September 1, 2019 violates the fundamental right to guarantee a decent subsistence level.

The idea of ​​working together is completely unrealistic, Kamalraj G. is quoted as saying on the website of the Society for Freedom Rights: “It starts with cooking. We have very different eating habits. I am Hindu and do not eat beef and fast regularly.» His roommates ate foods he could never eat. Some of them are recognized as entitled to asylum and do not receive any state aid because they work.

The lawsuit brought by Kamalraj G., who is now 40, was originally directed against the social welfare office in the city where he lives. The Düsseldorf Social Court suspended the proceedings and submitted them to the Federal Constitutional Court. In order to achieve exactly that, the Society for Freedom Rights had distributed a template to the German social courts, and the Düsseldorf judge made use of it.

Work may be required of asylum seekers

According to the Federal Constitutional Court, it is not apparent that savings are or could be achieved regularly in the collective accommodation through joint management that would support a reduction in benefits by ten percent. All benefit notifications since the legal regulation came into force on September 1, 2019, which have not yet become final, must now be adjusted accordingly.

Kamalraj G.’s application for asylum was rejected in 2017, since then he has been required to leave the country and has been tolerated. In 2019 he was in the hospital longer after attempting suicide. According to his own statements, he finally received a regular residence permit in August 2022.

The Federal Constitutional Court has previously ruled on the subsistence level for asylum seekers. In 2012, it stipulated that state aid for asylum seekers must be increased to roughly the level of social assistance and Hartz IV. The planned citizen’s income also makes rejected asylum seekers better again and raises their rates to the general level. The Federal Constitutional Court also states in the new decision that the legislator can demand that the asylum seeker actively participate in overcoming his need for help and can also reduce the payments if he does not do this despite concrete possibilities. However, a blanket reduction as provided for in the law is not permissible.

source site-111