|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact Deutsch | ||
|
AfD Demand Enforced by CDU District Administrator – No Opposition from SPD, Greens, LeftDistrict Administrator of Burgenlandkreis, Götz Ulrich, enforces an AfD demand that asylum seekers be obligated to perform community service and have their benefits cut if they refuse. 
At the end of June 2024, MDR and at the beginning of July 2024 the Volksstimme reported that Burgenlandkreis is among the few districts that obligate asylum seekers to perform community service and cut social benefits — i.e., the subsistence minimum — for those who refuse, which according to media reports is the majority. This is a demand from the AfD, which René Springer, the labor and social policy spokesperson for the AfD parliamentary group, calls for nationwide. In the Rosenheim district, the AfD faction submitted a motion demanding the introduction of this work obligation. This motion was rejected. The CSU district administrator Otto Lederer stated: “We see an individual case-dependent or general work obligation for asylum seekers as constitutionally highly questionable.” Furthermore, the provisions of Paragraph 5 of the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act (AsylbLG) are not applicable insofar as refugees, such as Ukrainian war refugees, are entitled to benefits under the AsylbLG. Practical obstacles, such as language barriers, also complicate the implementation of this regulation. In connection with the Hartz IV laws, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled in 2019 that a reduction of the subsistence minimum to just food, shelter, and basic personal and health care or even further is unconstitutional. Consequently, the Hartz IV laws had to be abolished or amended, leading to the introduction of the citizen’s allowance (Bürgergeld). According to the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act, benefits for those refusing work obligations shall only be granted to cover “their needs for food and accommodation including heating as well as personal and health care.” Only in exceptional individual cases may other benefits under § 3 paragraph 1 sentence 1 be granted. Benefits are to be provided in kind.” It took many years and a long process through various courts before the Hartz IV laws, which like the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act were enacted or amended under SPD and Greens leadership with CDU participation, were challenged. It can be assumed that a similarly long legal battle would have to be fought concerning the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act — provided there are affected persons willing and able to pursue it, who still live in Germany after many years and have a need for legal protection in this matter until it might eventually be heard by the Federal Constitutional Court. The ruling on Hartz IV sanctions PRO ASYL and all state refugee councils reject the work obligation for refugees and instead demand the lifting of all work bans for refugees. “It is racist and inhumane to suggest that refugees are unwilling to work and must now be forced to work under exploitative conditions for 80 cents an hour — while many of them simply are not allowed to work at all,” says Tareq Alaows, refugee policy spokesperson of PRO ASYL. “Instead of political agitation against refugees, all work bans and the so-called ‘toleration-light’ rule for refugees should finally be lifted — a promise of the coalition agreement of the traffic light government that remains unfulfilled,” Alaows continues. “If refugees can be sanctioned for refusing precarious jobs, this has nothing to do with fair employment but borders on forced labor. Instead of promoting a sensible and sustainable migration policy, it becomes clear once again that politics prefers to fuel the inhumane discourse of recent months, thereby encouraging the right-wing shift in society and the stigmatization of refugees,” says Dajana Strunz from the Saxon Refugee Council. More on the linked website. Inquiry to the members of the district council I requested statements from all parties represented in the district council regarding their stance on the fact that the district administrator is ultimately implementing a demand of the AfD and likely unconstitutional legislation. SPD, Greens, Left… no response, silence all around. The only response came from the United Citizens’ List Naumburg e.V.: “Following the recent amendment of the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act, the Burgenlandkreis is obliged to require refugees to take up work. This is done, among other things, through deployment in its own companies such as GESA. This measure aims to promote the integration of refugees and give them the opportunity to actively contribute to society. In the past, a reduction of the subsistence minimum for Hartz IV recipients was deemed unconstitutional by the Federal Constitutional Court. For asylum seekers, however, the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act applies, which contains its own regulations and sanctions. These sanctions are designed to ensure asylum seekers’ obligation to cooperate and motivate them to participate in offered measures. Burgenlandkreis is now implementing these provisions of the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act. This means that refugees who refuse to accept offered work opportunities must expect corresponding sanctions. These sanctions can include cuts to financial benefits. The goal of these measures is not to punish refugees but to integrate them into the labor market and give them the chance to integrate into society. Work in the district’s companies offers them the opportunity to acquire new skills, improve their language skills, and ultimately increase their chances on the job market.” The inquiry was also sent to the Zeitzer Alliance for Diversity and Democracy, as this group had organized several demonstrations against the right, attended by District Administrator Götz Ulrich. All participants at these demonstrations emphasized distancing themselves from the AfD and forming a firewall against the right wing. This alliance also gave no response. It is worth recalling here the speech by District Administrator Götz Ulrich in the district council, where, in view of an announced AfD demonstration in Bad Bibra, which could have passed in front of his house, he warned against their Nazi methods and vowed to stand firm. He wanted to “stand with all his might for the free democratic basic order wherever it is necessary.” Opinion: In my opinion, the sanctions against asylum seekers are likely just as unconstitutional as those in the Hartz IV legislation. It is once again astonishing that these laws were enacted under red-green governments with CDU involvement. These are the same parties that internationally always push for respect of human rights in other countries. One can certainly agree with PRO ASYL’s view, especially considering human dignity, which according to Article 1 of the Basic Law is inviolable and the obligation of all state authority to respect and protect. Certainly, the district can rely on the current legislation and thus also fulfill the AfD’s demand. But with the experience from the Hartz IV legislation, it should be clear that the regulations in the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act are very likely unconstitutional. So far, there is no court ruling, which probably will never come (see above interview with Ralph Boes). The question is whether it is morally justified to hide behind the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act. Just because something is written in a law doesn’t mean it is legally or morally acceptable. In recent years, there have been several laws and political initiatives declared unconstitutional. It is always astonishing that this is not recognized in advance by politics despite the high number of advisors. Or is it meant to be ignored? Author: AI-Translation - Michael Thurm | 15.07.2024 |
|
| Other articles: |
 | IKIG – Ecological and Ideological Madness?Criticism of the IKIG (Intermunicipal Industrial Zone) is often ignored, bypassed, or even deliberately concealed by regional politicians. This was clearly demonstrated by recent e... zum Artikel |
 | Wolves from Zeitz spotted at demonstration in BerlinThey fear neither weather nor discomfort, neither kilometers nor traffic jams, neither crowds nor the fine dust of the big city. They set off for Berlin to demonstrate for peace, f... zum Artikel |
 | Did the Mayor Lie? – Is the Cat (IKIG) Being Sold in a Sack?The unanswered inquiry from Wolfgang Gotthelf to Weißenfels Mayor Martin Papke raises serious questions.... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |