Schengen Agreement: Dobrindt’s twisted arguments for border controls

Border controls within the EU were abolished more than 40 years ago. The Schengen Agreement has been in effect since then. Nevertheless, controls at the German borders have become a permanent condition. The EU Commission demands an end to this practice. But Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) is sticking to his course. We are publishing a document that shows how skewed his argument for border controls is.

Border controls in the Schengen area are only permitted temporarily and with a valid reason. If an EU member state temporarily controls its borders, the government must periodically explain to the EU Commission why this is necessary. This happens in so-called notification letters. We received the current letter from February 2026 via the Freedom of Information Act (IFG) and are publishing it in full. In the document, Federal Interior Minister Dobrindt explains in detail why he still believes the controls are necessary.

As early as 2023, the then SPD Interior Minister Nancy Faeser introduced Germany-wide internal border controls. Dobrindt has massively expanded this practice since taking office. Asylum seekers can now be turned back at the border, which the courts say is an illegal practice. The current order runs until September 2026.

Brussels is calling for an end to border controls

At the beginning of June 2026, the EU Commission called on Germany to end border controls: “From the EU Commission’s point of view, a gradual reduction of border controls in the nine member states where they currently exist is possible and appropriate – including in Germany,” said Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunnerwho is a member of the Austrian ÖVP, the sister party of Dobrindt’s CSU. The Commission bases its assessment on the European Asylum Reform (CEAS), which will soon come into force, and a “drastic” decline in the number of asylum seekers.

In fact, the numbers have been falling since 2024 continuously. Last year, around 113,000 people in Germany applied for asylum – around half as many as in the previous year. If you exclude the pandemic year 2020, this is the lowest value since 2013.

For Dobrindt, the falling numbers are apparently no reason to lift the controls. On the contrary: “In the last few months we have been able to see how effective our measures are in pushing back illegal migration,” said Dobrindt in response to Brussels. These successes should not be jeopardized. Only when the protection of the EU’s external borders improves can we talk about ending internal border controls.

The absurdity of Dobrindt’s argument: In the notification letter he refers to the fact that the EU Commission determined in 2025 that Germany’s asylum system was burdened. He ignores the fact that the same commission is currently coming to the conclusion that border controls are now unnecessary.

Crooked arguments

Other arguments with which Dobrindt wants to support the continuation of his isolation policy also appear to be unfounded. He argues that courts are overloaded due to the increasing number of asylum claims. However, the fact that more people are suing against their asylum decisions says nothing about the situation at the borders. Rather, it says something about how thoroughly the asylum procedures were conducted beforehand. An obvious reason for more lawsuits: The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) is currently making its asylum decisions much faster than a few years ago – and not necessarily more thoroughly.

Dobrindt also states that border controls would significantly increase security. According to him, “people traveling across borders with extremist or terrorist threat potential” could be identified as early as possible. He doesn’t explain exactly how this should happen. In practice it turns out that during border controls decisions are made largely arbitrarily as to which people are flagged down for a check. This poses the risk of racial profiling, i.e. checks based on skin color, language, origin or religion without suspicion. A Syrian journalist, an Innsbruck international law professor and a black person are currently independently suing against German practice at the borders.

A lawsuit of this kind has already been successful. A German criminal law professor traveled back to Germany in a public bus from a ceremony to mark the 40th anniversary of Schengen in Luxembourg. He was checked in a parking lot immediately after the border crossing, regardless of suspicion. The Koblenz Administrative Court ruledthat this identity check was unlawful. The border controls within the EU at that time fundamentally violated EU law. There was no “sustainable factual basis” for the controls.

Unlawful practice

But it is not just whether there are checks at the borders and who is selected for a check that is legally controversial. The practice introduced under Dobrindt of turning people back at the border is also more than questionable. Several courts have already declared them illegal. The Berlin Administrative Court decided for the first time in an expedited procedure in June 2025that three people who were rejected at the German-Polish border – including an underage girl – are allowed to enter the country and go through an asylum procedure.

The same court recently ruled similarly in the case of a man who also crossed the German-Polish border and wanted to apply for asylum. The federal police claimed that the man had not even said that he was seeking asylum. The court found the police’s explanations to be “incomplete”. The court also emphasized that anyone who seeks protection in any way submits an asylum application in the legal sense – even without directly saying the word asylum application.

→ To the inquiry

→ To the documents