Refugee policy: SPD district administrator calculates with the federal government

Mr. Jendricke, CDU boss Friedrich Merz wants to detain all people who are liable to deport, to accelerate the returns. Agreed?
That sounds good in theory. But in practice it cannot work. This would be at least 42,000 migrants throughout Germany. There are simply too few deportation places. This is also due to the fact that it was not yet politically wanted. Thuringia, for example, only holds two deportation places-and they are Rhineland-Palatinate. This is a scandal that goes to the Greens’ account, which has occupied the Migration Ministry here in the country for the past ten years. It was difficult to impossible to make deportations.

And the Social Democrats occupy the Interior Ministry responsible for deportation.
Of course, the former state government is responsible for this. But the actual failure took place in the federal government for years. During Angela Merkel and the traffic light coalition’s CDU government, huge errors were made in migration policy. The state has thus unintentionally organized human suffering, whether in Mannheim, Solingen or most recently in Aschaffenburg.

So it also propagates the AfD.
This is not an exclusive knowledge of the AfD. I and many counterparts have been saying that for years. The deportation system is dysfunctional. More than half of the returns are canceled because people can escape, also by court decisions. The laws must be changed here.

So no more legal protection for refugees?
I didn’t say that. Such an asylum procedure runs for months, sometimes for years – with all legal objections that must continue to exist. But if the state then does not grant refugee status or asylum and there are no reasons for toleration, there is the final decision on the obligation to leave. After that, people can leave and may also get this financed, including a starting amount for their home country. That is the desired rule. Only when you do not use this good option yourself is the deportation of the Ultima Ratio. Why, on the other hand, it can still be complained to me and my official employees.

Do you not hide the fact that deportation numbers have risen last?
But from a level that is too low. I don’t see any clear trend reversal. Shortly before the state elections in Saxony and Thuringia, the federal government sent a deportation trailer to Afghanistan. That’s it. For me, the Aschaffenburg case shows a double state failure again. First, the failure of the federal government: it did not organize sufficient deportation fees. Secondly, the failure of the regional courts and authorities. The suspect should no longer have been in Germany – or at least in custody or in the execution.

Don’t you make it too easy?
The alleged perpetrator had previously been mentally noticeable and had committed crimes. One question is to the dishes whether they decide according to the seriousness of the situation. With foreign perpetrators, whose previous life story we do not know sufficiently, there must be an adjustment faster.

The courts adhere to the applicable laws. Should you no longer do that?
There is always room for discretion. But in the end, you are right, the question of the legislator also addresses whether it does not have to pay off. I say as a district administrator: our instruments are not enough. We have the social psychiatric service in the health offices, which should accompany these people in any form. But even with smaller acts of violence, the authorities can not instruct the striking people to the hospital for a long time or to the intelligence enforcement in order to at least to examine them and to stop them. No, something bad has to happen so that it is traded. According to the jurisprudence of the Federal Constitutional Court, anyone can pursue their spinning. This is not acceptable in terms of security policy and, by the way, does not help those affected.

So you want to lock all mentally striking people away?
No, of course not. But our legal options are not enough to intervene preventively, even in the sense of these striking people. And honestly: some psychological abnormalities from foreign perpetrators also have something to do with religious fanaticism. Here the principle is finally needed again: security against humanity. This also applies to the necessary deportations. These people must not stay here.

As a social democrat, don’t you feel committed to humanity?
Of course. I personally organized the buses almost three years ago to bring the Ukrainian refugees from Berlin to me into the district. People in need must be helped. We also try to accommodate all refugees in an orderly manner and to ensure their integration. But this help must not completely overwhelm us. And above all, it must not endanger our internal security. Security against humanity: This is also the principle that applies to every visa. If there is doubts in any form or unclear data, there is no entry permit.

But a person on the run …
… does not necessarily have all the necessary papers, of course. If the refugees show themselves cooperatively and help to determine their identity, that’s okay. But the one who demonstrably disguised their identity or even provide incorrect information we have to consider them as a security risk. This means that at best they would have to be rejected at the border or, if necessary, to enforce custody until they reveal their true identity.

Do you agree to Merz that all illegal entry must be prevented?
In principle yes. I only see practical difficulties again, both in border security and when dealing with neighboring countries. But as a district administrator, I do not want to comment on that, I am not responsible for border security. But what I can say: We are constantly overwhelmed in the municipalities. The fact that 250,000 people in the asylum area came to Germany last year might have been so manageable. But this – mostly illegal – immigration takes place on a base of 1.2 million other Ukrainian refugees. This large number of migrants can no longer be mastered, not in integration, not in the social system and not on the housing market.

A question to the Social Democrat Jendricke: Do you share your party’s outrage that the Union wants to create a majority with AfD, FDP and BSW this week?
I think it is risky and wrong to de facto to search for majorities with the AfD. But the truth also includes that the traffic light parties-and especially the Greens-refused and constantly braked in these questions of reality. The SPD also reacted too late at this point. We need a turn in refugee policy. The principle of wandering all immigrants to Germany and welcoming here: This has long been no longer acceptable.

So what should the SPD do?
It should now move towards the CDU and clearly set away from the Greens, despite the hot election campaign. On the other hand, Merz has to come back to reason, because later in a government he will not be able to keep his promises. Otherwise there is only one big winner this week and later in the Bundestag election. And that’s the AfD.