ECJ Rules Rejected Asylum Seekers Must Receive Basic Necessities

What does a human being need to survive with dignity while they await asylum and to be transferred from one European country to another?

That was the question before the judges of European Court of justice (ECJ) as they delivered a ruling on whether benefits provided by Germany fell short of the EU's expectations.

The ECJ was asked to interpret the rights of an Afghan asylum-seeker, identified as FB, whose asylum application had been rejected by Germany and who was due to be deported to Romania, where he first claimed asylum in 2021.

While FB waited to be transferred he was provided food, heated accommodation, and hygiene and healthcare, but received no assistance for clothing and other household items. A law in Germany slashed benefits for rejected asylum-seekers in what activists described as "bed, bread, and soap" subsistence.

FB sued the Bavarian district of Schweinfurt after his benefits were cut in 2022, but the case finally ended up at the ECJ.

On Thursday, the court ruled in favor of the rejected asylum-seeker and said that basic necessities such as clothing and household goods may not be withdrawn even if an asylum application is rejected.

Clothing is among the "most basic needs" the court said, and cash benefits for daily necessities such as travel tickets and communication devices ensure a "minimum level of participation in the social and cultural life" of the member state in which a person resides. This allowance contributes "to ensuring the subsistence of the applicant and to protecting the applicant's physical and mental health."

Activists welcomed the ruling and expect it to have an EU-wide impact. But a new migration pact makes things unclear.

FB applied for asylum in Germany in 2021. A year later, his application was deemed "inadmissible."

The EU's migration policy is governed by the Dublin Regulation, under which an application for asylum is deemed inadmissible when another participating state has already assumed or been designated responsibility for the claim.

This is meant to discourage secondary movement and stop asylum-seekers from flocking to a few nations, and instead distribute them across the bloc.

Migration has become a top political issue in Germany over the last decade, used as a major talking point by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) to drum up electoral support. In a bid to win back voters, the elected German government has come under pressure to reduce benefits for asylum-seekers.

Under an amendment to the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act in 2024, Germany allowed the granting of food, housing and healthcare but reduced the provision of cash.

"In practice, that can mean none or very little cash," Wiebke Judith, a policy and advocacy officer for Pro Asyl, a German NGO working for human rights and refugee protection in Europe, told DW.

Activists claimed the absence of clothing and cash denied adequate living standards and hence violated the spirit of the EU's Reception Conditions Directive, which sets minimum standards for assistance to asylum applicants across the bloc, including for those who have been rejected.

"The sociocultural component of the subsistence minimum was eliminated" by Germany in the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act, Pro Asyl said in a statement. But the court's ruling "clearly rejected this reduction in benefits," it said.

The ECJ's ruling indicates that even rejected asylum-seekers must have access to essential support until their transfer is actually carried out.

Far-right and even some conservative politicians in Europe have objected to what they have called "generous welfare" benefits for asylum-seekers, describing them as a pull factor attracting migrants from non-EU countries to Europe.

The AfD in Germany has said migrants pocket cash assistance or send it to families back home. The far-right party also claimed credit when the German government introduced a debit card with a fixed amount to make purchases instead of cash in 2024.

But activists have said such restrictions will not deter immigrants, and instead force them to become a part of the informal economy. Those fleeing war and persecution, Judith said earlier, won't be deterred by a lack of benefits.

Thursday's ruling provides an EU‑wide guidance for national authorities on treating asylum-seekers during transfer procedures, reinforcing the protection of fundamental rights throughout the asylum process.

And yet there are concerns that come June 12, when the new EU migration pact kicks in, the victory at the ECJ may not mean much.

"It won't help for too long," Gerard Sadik, asylum manager at La Cimade, a French NGO that provides legal support for asylum-seekers, told DW. The new migration pact "offers fewer benefits," he said,

"The new rules from 12 June say that member states may reduce or withdraw daily allowances" and other benefits "for applicants who are required to be present in another member state," Swedish political scientist Bernd Parusel told DW.

"At the same time, they still need to ensure a standard of living in accordance with union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and international obligations," he added.

Judith of Pro Asyl was more optimistic and pleased with the court's direction. "The court's ruling reveals a direction of travel, that it sees personal benefits as essential to a dignified life," she said.

Edited by: Martin Kuebler