German Court Ruling Must Not Risk Premature Assessments of Syria or Jumpstart Returns
For over six months, several EU member states have suspended the processing of asylum applications from Syrian nationals, rightly citing shifting and uncertain conditions on the ground as a barrier to assessing claims of persecution and serious harm. Recently, however, a court ruling in Germany determined that country conditions are now assessable in Syria. The judgement, binding only in this specific case, is the first decision in the EU that argues the situation in Syria is no longer sufficiently uncertain to uphold the suspension of asylum decisions.
Despite the judgement’s limited binding nature, its issuance signals that Germany and other EU member states may be ready to begin processing asylum claims in the near future. The increasingly negative rhetoric aimed at migrants in the EU and policy makers’ explicit calls for returning Syrians to Syria raise fears that once asylum processes restart and country conditions are assessed, individuals whose claims are denied will be returned to Syria despite unsafe conditions.
German Court Rules that the Situation in Syria can be Assessed
On May 23, 2025, the 8th Chamber of the Karlsruhe Administrative Court in Germany ruled that the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) is no longer allowed to suspend a decision for the concerned Syrian asylum applicant as the situation in Syria is no longer uncertain. The case before the Karlsruhe Administrative Court was brought by a Syrian national who had filed an asylum application with the BAMF in October 2023. Having received no decision on his case for a year, the Syrian national filed an enforcement action in October 2024, requesting that the BAMF issue a decision regarding his application. In response, the Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, finding that there was no longer reason to delay his asylum decision for the purpose of assessing country conditions. The Court pointed to several sources of information now available on the situation in Syria, such as an internal report the BAMF itself had produced on conditions inside Syria in March and a Country-of-Origin report by the European Union Asylum Agency (EUAA) from the same month.
Importantly, the ruling issued by the Karlsruhe Administrative Court applies only to the Syrian national who brought the case forward – not all Syrian asylum applicants – and the BAMF will have to schedule an interview with the applicant before deciding on the merits of the asylum application. That said, this ruling represents the first decision in the EU that argues the situation in Syria is no longer sufficiently uncertain to uphold the suspension of asylum decisions. If the reasoning is adopted by other courts, it has the potential to provide relief to asylum seekers whose decisions have been pending since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in December, which has left Syrians in legal limbo for the last 6 months. However, given the broader anti-refugee rhetoric proliferating in the EU, serious concerns remain as to how the BAMF will decide on whether the applicant is eligible for protection and, if not, whether Syria is safe for refugee returns.
Shifting Immigration Policy in the EU
The case before the Karlsruhe Administrative Court was decided amidst an increasingly hostile environment for migrants in the EU and particularly for Syrians. EU policy makers across various member states have long been pursuing draconian measures to reduce the rates of asylum seekers within their territory. Even before the fall of Assad, EU member states made attempts to declare Syria safe, and efforts have only ramped up since his fall. Denmark, one of the first states to declare parts of Damascus safe for return while Assad was in power, has since been pursuing a “zero refugee policy,” and its effects have been reverberating across other Member States, including Austria as it works to temporarily halt family reunification for migrants. Meanwhile, in the Netherlands, the government has collapsed after Geert Wilders withdrew his party from the ruling coalition after his unprecedented, strict asylum policies failed to garner support in the coalition. Wilders had been advocating for a 10-point plan that included sending refugees back to Syria.
This anti-refugee rhetoric is particularly relevant for Syrian asylum applicants, as Syrians have been among the largest group of asylum seekers in the EU since the conflict in Syria began in 2011. With the recent governance change in Syria, many policy makers across the EU see an opening for refugee returns. For instance, while the interior ministry of Austria declared its intention to start a deportation program for Syrians in the near future, Cyprus implemented a policy to pay asylum seekers and those with international protection from Syria to voluntarily return home. The actions of EU Member States are sending a clear message: the change in governance in Syria means that Syrians should return home – irrespective of potential threats and insecurity persisting in the country.
As individual member states have advanced anti-refugee rhetoric, it has implicated EU policy as well. On March 17, 2025, the EU Commission presented a new regulation proposing a centralized system for returning third-country nationals “staying illegally” in the EU. The proposal’s stated objectives are to increase the efficiency of the return process and ensure that individuals with return decisions leave the EU, “either forcible or voluntarily.”
The regulation was not received without controversy: many civil society actors opposed the regulation due to several provisions that increase the length of detention for rejected asylum seekers, establish return hubs outside of the EU, and remove administrative protections asylum seekers currently enjoy, among other detrimental changes. Despite its controversial nature, however, the proposal is slated for voting and potential amendment by the European Parliament and the Council. A vote is then expected by the end of 2025 during the Danish Presidency of the Council of the EU, when it is likely that Denmark – a notoriously anti-immigration government – will push the issue forward.
Premature Returns to Syria Lack Safety and Dignity
While the current situation in Syria may be considered more stable than the extremely volatile situation that directly followed the overthrow of the Assad government, conditions are still rapidly changing and rights violations are ongoing. Since the fall of Assad, SJAC and other organizations operating within the Syrian territory have documented human rights violations in areas across Syria, demonstrating the continued volatility of the situation.
Due to the unstable and changing nature of the situation on the ground in Syria, states should not restart country assessments of conditions as they are premature and not reliable. States should instead refer to UNHCR guidance on when the situation in Syria has stabilized enough to allow for reliable information on the security and human rights situation. Should, however, the recent ruling in Germany be more broadly adopted across the country and conditions in Syria assessed, assessments should occur on a frequent basis to ensure conditions are accurate and reliable if and when used to support or refute asylum claims.
Just as the assessment of country conditions should remain paused, so should the processing of asylum claims, with exceptions made in cases where there remains a clear reason for states to grant a positive decision. For example, certain groups, such as women or members of the LGBTQ+ community, may face similar acts of persecution despite the fall of the Assad government. To identify such cases, states should individually assess asylum applications while refraining from issuing negative decisions until reliable information is available. States should also provide asylum seekers with clear guidance on what rights individuals have while their claims are pending.
Even if states proceed with issuing negative decisions, returns to Syria should not be carried out as they cannot be considered safe or dignified. For returns to be safe and dignified, returnees must not be subjected to an unsafe physical, legal, or material environment or to policies that deny them their human rights, including their civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. This entails ensuring returnees have access to basic services, such as housing, health, education, food, and decent work; humanitarian assistance and services upon return; economic opportunities and sustainable integration; and be free from attacks and guaranteed freedom of movement. Syria, however, remains unable to guarantee respect for such rights. After over a decade of conflict, nine out of 10 Syrians continue to live in poverty, while almost half of all children from 6 to 15 years old are not attending school. Moreover, one in four Syrians are unemployed, and estimates remain that it will take at least 55 years for the GDP to be restored to pre-conflict GDP levels.
With the current lack of access to basic services and human rights guarantees, returns to Syria are premature as they cannot be considered safe or dignified. They may also jeopardize the recent economic development occurring in Syria following the lifting of sanctions, as wide scale returns can put further strain on an already struggling economy. As such, EU member states’ objective to return Syrians must not be prioritized over the fundamental human rights of Syrians, and the EU should follow UNHCR guidance on what constitutes safe and dignified returns.
Lastly, many Syrians in the EU have established their lives abroad, obtaining educational degrees, contributing to the workforce, and raising children and families for the last several years in the EU. While many Syrians will want to return to Syria after being away, some may not. In either case, Syrians should be given the choice to decide, and for those who wish to stay in the EU, EU member states should provide them with the possibility to obtain permanent residence.
___________________________
For more information or to provide feedback, please contact SJAC at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to SJAC’s newsletter for updates on our work