Crimes as protection: deportations in the German judiciary

Crimes as protection: deportations in the German judiciary

In Germany there are worrying tendencies that give the impression that serious crimes remain unpunished and perpetrators are protected from deportation. This leads to an enigmatic situation in which serious crimes such as murder is considered a strategy to avoid deportation. The case of Islamic terrorist Issa el-H recently. caused a stir in Solingen. He was responsible for the murder of three people and should have theoretically be deported to Bulgaria in early 2023. Instead, he dived and continued his criminal activities.

In recent years, numerous cases have become known in which foreign perpetrators could remain in Germany due to serious crimes. The Syrian asylum seeker Mohammed Daleel in 2016 lit a bomb in Ansbach and injured 15 people, although his asylum application had already been rejected. Another case is that of the murderer Hussein K., who brutally raped and murdered the student Maria Ladenburger in Freiburg in Freiburg in 2016. The perpetrator had come to Germany as a minor refugee, although he had previously been convicted in Greece.

serious crimes as a "protective mechanism"

The problem is tightened by the fact that serious crimes in Germany often act as a kind of protective mechanism against deportation. In the event of a murder, the perpetrator is usually detained and temporarily excluded from the deportation process. This reinforces the incentive for people who fear their designation, despair or because of their prehistory for extreme measures. A particularly concise example is the case of Ibrahim A., an stateless Palestinian who killed two people on the train in January 2023, although his asylum application had long been rejected.

In the political discussion, it is often discussed that the inner -German authorities rip off the actual extent of the problem in the dark. The database on violent crimes of people who are obliged to travel is inadequate and often not available. Upon inquiries, various interior ministries in Germany expressed that they do not have any reliable statistics or that they cannot provide any information on this topic. A responsible ministry said: "The data you requested cannot be represented in police crime statistics." This shows a worrying gap in the transparency and responsibility.

lack of willingness to return and the role of politics

Another critical aspect is the lack of willingness of politics to find clearer solutions. After the murders in Solingen, politicians discuss possible procedures for deporting perpetrators such as Issa el-H. But many of the necessary steps remain incomplete. The interior ministries do not seem to be enough to make a preventive data and information collection to find out how many violent offenses were committed by people who should be deported. As long as this data is not collected, the problem remains invisible and cannot be addressed effectively. The public expects the authorities and politics to take responsibility to avoid such incidents in the future.

In this context, comparisons with other countries are also relevant, such as the terrible “Ikea murder” in Sweden in 2015, where an Afghan asylum seeker stood up after previous rejections of residence permits. These incidents illustrate the urgent need to consider a systematic procedure against perpetrators who are obliged to leave, especially if they are already a criminal record due to violence.

The extent that serious crimes in Germany are not adequately pursued urgently requires a fundamental review of the existing regulations and more intensive cooperation between the various political and authorities. This is the only way to achieve positive changes that protect both the victims and society as a whole.