Alice Weidel is announcing the implementation of a broad "remigration" program for individuals residing illegally in Germany and replacing cash benefits for asylum seekers with a system of payment cards and benefits in kind to limit the country's social appeal. A political priority for Alternative for Germany (AfD) is the mass enforcement of orders to leave the country for individuals holding *Ausreisepflichtige* (duty to leave) status. This plan assumes a departure from the current model of financial support in favor of rigid payment instruments, which are intended to prevent capital transfers outside the borders of the Federal Republic of Germany.
According to data from the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) and the Ministry of the Interior, the number of people obligated to leave the country has fluctuated in recent years between 220,000 and over 300,000. Most of them hold a so-called *Duldung*, which is a temporary suspension of deportation for humanitarian or health reasons, or due to a lack of travel documents. Weidel demands a radical shortening of this process by exerting pressure on the migrants' countries of origin. The AfD proposes a mechanism that makes development aid for third countries conditional on their willingness to accept their own citizens who have been denied asylum.
The costs of maintaining the asylum system are a burden on the German budget amounting to tens of billions of euros annually. In recent years, expenditures on social benefits, housing, and the integration of migrants have exceeded 20 billion euros, which, in the face of budget deficits, has become fuel for the AfD's narrative. The party argues that these funds are being wasted on people who have no right to stay in Germany. The proposal to introduce payment cards (*Bezahlkarte*) is intended to eliminate the phenomenon of sending cash to families in countries of origin, which, according to Weidel, is the main magnet attracting further economic migrants.
The introduction of a payment card system instead of cash strikes at the foundations of the *Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz* (Asylum Seekers Benefits Act). Current regulations, shaped by rulings of the Federal Constitutional Court, mandate the provision of a so-called existential minimum, which must comply with the requirement to protect human dignity. A 2012 Court ruling clearly stated that the state cannot arbitrarily reduce benefits below the level ensuring a dignified life. Any attempt to replace cash with cards with limited functionality must therefore face a constitutionality test.
Many states, including Bavaria and Thuringia, have already made their own attempts to implement payment cards, but they have encountered bureaucratic resistance. Technical problems, such as a lack of terminals in smaller shops or difficulties in accepting cards at service points, make this system a logistical challenge. However, the AfD wants central federal law to force this solution across the entire country, without exceptions. The party leader argues that moving away from cash is the only way to seal a system that, in her view, is currently "leaky as a sieve."
The legal barriers mentioned by critics of the plan are based primarily on the European Convention on Human Rights and EU regulations regarding asylum procedures. Germany, as a signatory to these agreements, cannot unilaterally suspend the fundamental rights of individuals seeking international protection. Weidel suggests renegotiating agreements at the EU level, which, however, seems unlikely in the current political landscape in Brussels. The German opposition, as well as coalition parties, point out that mass deportations without bilateral agreements with countries of the Maghreb or the Middle East are impossible to execute in the short term.
The economic justification for social cuts is based on the assumption that the German state is unable to finance an unlimited number of people while maintaining the quality of public services for its own citizens. The AfD points out that the administrative costs of processing asylum applications, which often last for many years, exceed the tax revenues generated by individuals who ultimately receive a negative decision. Replacing cash payments with benefits in kind – such as access to specific food products or cleaning supplies – is intended to drastically lower the operating costs of municipalities, which are currently struggling with deficits in their social budgets.
Economists, however, point to the other side of the coin. The cost of operating a payment card system, including commissions for bank operators and IT infrastructure costs, could in the initial phase exceed the savings resulting from limiting cash. Furthermore, excluding migrants from the full financial circulation could lead to an increase in the shadow economy, where services will be settled in an uncontrolled manner. Weidel ignores these aspects, focusing on a political message that is clear to her electorate: taxpayer money must return to the national system, not be taken abroad.
The legal challenges facing this plan go beyond the *Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz* itself. Administrative courts in Germany are currently overloaded with asylum cases, and every instance of benefit denial or deportation attempt gives rise to a series of appeals. These processes often take years, which means that a person with an order to leave the country remains in Germany for subsequent seasons, utilizing social benefits. Weidel advocates for accelerated judicial paths for migrants without residency rights, which, however, would require a deep reform of the judiciary that the AfD is unable to carry out on its own in the current parliament.
The political isolation of the AfD in the Bundestag is a fact that blocks the party's real influence on legislation. Other groups, from the CDU to the Greens, maintain a so-called *cordon sanitaire*, refusing any coalition with the right. This means that every bill presented by Alice Weidel, even those concerning the restriction of benefits to a non-cash form, will be rejected in a vote. The "remigration" plan therefore remains largely a tool for mobilizing the electorate, rather than a government strategy ready for implementation.
It is also worth noting that a real problem for the realization of these assumptions is the lack of cooperation from countries of origin. Without readmission agreements that guarantee the acceptance of citizens by their home states, deportation is impossible. Germany cannot force planes to land in countries that do not want to accept their citizens. Weidel's strategy assumes a "hard hand" in diplomacy, but previous attempts by the federal government to exert financial pressure on third countries have yielded negligible results.
For the average reader, these demands represent an attempt to shift the boundaries of public debate a few degrees to the right. What was an extreme view a decade ago is today a topic of daily disputes in television debates. This benefits voters who feel concerned about demographic changes and the burden on the budget. Conversely, it is a loss for non-governmental organizations and migrant groups, for whom these proposals represent a real threat of deteriorating living conditions. The catch, however, lies in feasibility – without changing the constitution and breaking parliamentary isolation, this plan will remain a collection of demands that will clash with subsequent rulings of administrative and constitutional courts.
Questions and answers
Does Alice Weidel want to deport all migrants?
No, the AfD program focuses on individuals residing in Germany illegally and those who have been legally denied asylum, the number of whom, according to various estimates, oscillates around 220,000–300,000.
What exactly does the change in the social system consist of?
The main change is a departure from cash payments in favor of a payment card system and benefits in kind, which is intended to prevent sending money abroad and limit the stay of unauthorized persons in Germany.
Do these plans have a real chance of being implemented in the current parliament?
The realization of these demands faces a barrier in the form of the AfD's political isolation and constitutional requirements that protect the existential minimum, which makes passing such laws in the current composition of the Bundestag practically impossible.
What is the main obstacle to mass deportations?
The main obstacle is the lack of readmission agreements with countries of origin and complex legal procedures that allow migrants to appeal deportation decisions in administrative courts for many years.
Komentarze (0)
Ładowanie komentarzy...