Editorial – Pasta salad on the fringes of the rule of law
By Misch Pautsch Switch to German for original article
Germany is stubbornly sticking to its border controls. Neither EU law, nor objections from ministers in neighbouring countries, nor requests from the European Commission, and certainly not rulings by German courts, seem capable of shaking that position.
This article is provided free of charge. If you'd like to support our team, take out a subscription now.
"Your ID and vehicle documents, please." A practised, friendly tone. Here we go again. I'm standing at the Luxembourg-German border. Annoyed. No, more than just annoyed. Something deep inside you stirs when you find yourself surrounded by half a dozen police officers in bulletproof vests, cheerfully munching on pre-packaged pasta salad while carrying out orders that several courts have ruled unlawful at first instance.
A total of three German courts have so far ruled that intra-European border controls are unlawful – so far. Further cases are pending. Yet, in the sober words of the Tagesschau: "So far, the Federal Government has seen no reason to comply with the court rulings and halt the controls."
For this self-proclaimed constitutional state, court rulings handed down "in the name of the people" did not, it seems, constitute sufficient grounds to refrain from activities that had been declared unlawful. A call from the European Commission to ignore the checks, along with several discussions with ministers from neighbouring countries and complaints lodged with the European Commission, had no effect: nothing. Nor have reports that the 14,000 officers stationed at the borders are exacerbating the acute staffing shortage within the police force – the very problem supposedly underlying the security concerns – made any difference. The next request to extend the controls has already been submitted, as though the answer would have any bearing on whether they are actually implemented.
The federal government refers to the rulings against the checks as "case-by-case decisions". By the same logic, I could stroll through the streets with three court rulings in my pocket and smash every single window within sight. After all, the rulings only apply to the specific streets I've been on previously. And anyway: a higher court could overturn the decision. In any case, I'd be willing to bet on it, whilst, with pasta salad in one hand and a brick in the other, I search for the next window.
Continue reading for free
Get access to this article by subscribing to our newsletter that is sent twice a week. You also have to have a Journal account.
Already have an account?
Log in