TAZ: Mr. Falbush, in June the Cabinet of Ministers decided to cancel the “obligatory legal consultant, before ensuring the deportation.” Now the law comes to the Bundestag. What does this mean in practice?
Peter Palbush: First of all, this means that coalitioners incorrectly read the law. There is no “mandatory legal assistance before the deportation was given.”
Painting:
Tilo is wet
In an interview: Peter Palbush
60, has been a lawyer since 1998 and has been specializing in the trial in deportation. He evaluates all the process of glue that he has controlled since 2001 in statistics.
TAZ: Oh?
Fahlbusch: Probably, the coalition agreement means the regulation introduced in February 2024, according to which people in deportation are prescribed in this way if they are not yet represented. Friedrich Merza has already made the abolition of a mandatory duel in a duel of the Chancellor, because, in his opinion, they will prevent the deportation of “all tricks”. This naked populism has nothing to do with existing legal regulation.
TAZ: What is the mandatory task?
Fahlbusch: You only check whether the detention was legally ordered. When this regulation is canceled, it depends on happiness, individual access to information, social networks and assets, regardless of whether people come to a lawyer. I accompanied good 2600 customers throughout the country since 2001, more than half of the victims were at least partially imprisoned. On average, they were mistakenly detained for almost 4 weeks. This shows how much the lawns are needed for these people.
TAZ: Why are so many people mistaken in deportation?
Fahlbusch: The error range is incredibly wide. Sometimes people are in custody, although they do not need to leave the country at all, are sick and, therefore, cannot be discovered or minors. Sometimes people are locked in the wrong prison, that is, in agencies for criminal guardianship with respectively more rigid conditions. Some of them are simply forgotten in deportation: as soon as they were imprisoned, the competent authority does not care about the documents necessary for deportation.
TAZ: Can it be mandatory?
Fahlbusch: The order of a compulsory gross can help. Unfortunately, the law was implemented more poorly than correctly. Only one example: if the injured people do not know the lawyer, the court chooses them. Often they feel that the judges then dispose of such lawns that the victims represent, especially not very devoted. In many dishes, these lawns can no longer be changed later.
TAZ: If the coalition is on, the federal police also must receive the competence of the application for temporary detention or exit delay. Can you say that this will mean in practice?
Fahlbusch: For example, if the Federal Police meets people without real documents on the weekend at the control at railway stations, at the moment they cannot do anything. And immigration authorities, which can be applied to imprisonment, are often inaccessible. This should change new regulation. Nevertheless, the Federal Police will submit applications for prisoners without knowing foreign files and, therefore, special functions of the case. I am already predicting that all this will go wrong. The idea of constant arresting the exit of the danger and harsh criminals after they were serving imprisonment, in practice is more serious.
TAZ: What do you think serious?
Fahlbusch: Germany would again introduce a bend again if this project is implemented. The idea is to arrest the victims until they buy their passport or can be disclosed and deport their true personality. Therefore, the will of the people should be violated by imprisonment. This contradicts European legislation and unconstitutional, as in this coalition agreement.
TAZ: What else?
Fahlbusch: In some cases, benefits for those who are required by the country should be reduced or even deleted – the European court is currently dealing with whether it is allowed at all. The black and red coalition also wants to work in the EU, that people can also be deported in countries in which they are not related. If such a called “element of the connection” falls, it will be possible that he will deal with countries such as Rwanda. Imagine that you are deported to a country where you have never been and do not know anyone! For asylum procedures, the planned replacement of the official investigation principle is also extremely worried.
TAZ: What exactly do you mean?
Fahlbusch: Until now, the court and powers should clarify why refugees cannot remain in the country of origin – beyond what is represented by asylum seekers. If this is canceled, the courts can only rely on their decision on the facts that the participants themselves provide. Then refugees would have to receive all evidence in their case, that is, to represent all political, social and technical relations in the country of origin independently. For a person, this is often an obstacle that is difficult to overcome. I believe that the coalition agreement also explains that the fundamental right to asylum remains untouched: in any case, something still remains. If the coalition implements its projects, this will mean another serious deterioration in the legal status of refugees, far beyond the deportation area.
