Berlin Senate Wants to Deport Four EU and US Pro-Palestine Activists 

Unknown woman forcibly detained by a group of policemen at the Humbold Uni Protests (TAGESSPIEGEL)

The unprecedented move on deporting legal residents of Germany, three of which are EU citizens usually entitled to freedom of movement between EU states, raises serious questions about Germany’s crackdown on civil liberties, such as freedom of speech. For what possible reasons does the German state see the deportation of these four persons warrantable? Acknowledging the legality of their residence and the utter lack of convictions on any of the proposed allegations, it is abundantly clear that the affected are targeted solely by reason of their opinions regarding Israel's war on Gaza and the exercising of their constitutional right to free speech. Does the German state have the right to deport individuals for exercising their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression? A right so integral to Germany’s character that it appears in Germany’s Basic Law, in the form of Article 5: “Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures, and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources”. To what extent are these deportation orders legally admissible? 

The deportation orders were issued by the state of Berlin, whose Senate administration oversees immigration enforcement, under German migration law, which does not require criminal convictions for deportation. Internal pressures from the department led to dissension, with bureaucrats from the branches of the Senate of Berlin clashing. Immigration authorities such as Silke Buhlmann, head of crime prevention and repatriation at the immigration agency, fervently objected to the orders of deportation. In an email directed towards Berlin Senate’s Interior Department, Ms. Buhlmann raises concerns pertaining to the legality of the deportations, stating that the legal basis for the deportations is simply insufficient, rendering the prospective deportations unlawful. She references director of the national immigration office, Engelhard Mazanke as a figure who shares these concerns. Buhlmann refuses to sign the deportation order and comply with the directive to conduct hearings for the individuals. This remonstration was overruled by Berlin Senate Department official, Christian Oestmann, who ordered the directive to be complied with and the expulsion orders to be carried out, regardless of the concerns raised. 

Three of the four deportation orders cite Germany's national pledge to defend Israel (Staatsräson) as justification. “Staatsräson” is a pledge and effectively just a concept at the end of the day. Oberhäuser, of the Bar Association’s immigration committee, states that “Staatsräson is a principle rather than a meaningful legal category”. Additionally, recently a parliamentary body argued that there are no legally binding effects of the provision. Legal experts, including Oberhäuser, argue that using Staatsräson in deportation proceedings is legally dubious and impermissible under constitutional law. 

Demo Signs at the "Defend the Berlin Four Rally" on 07.04.2025 (Instagram: @molotov.potography)