this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2025
204 points (87.5% liked)

Europe

5107 readers
1607 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Berlin’s immigration authorities are moving to deport four young foreign residents on allegations related to participation in protests against Israel’s war on Gaza, an unprecedented move that raises serious concerns over civil liberties in Germany.

The deportation orders, issued under German migration law, were made amid political pressure and over internal objections from the head of the state of Berlin’s immigration agency.

The internal strife arose because three of those targeted for deportation are citizens of European Union member states who normally enjoy freedom of movement between E.U. countries. None of the four has been convicted of any crimes.

“What we’re seeing here is straight out of the far right’s playbook,” said Alexander Gorski, a lawyer representing two of the protesters. “You can see it in the U.S. and Germany, too: Political dissent is silenced by targeting the migration status of protesters.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] duchess@feddit.org 10 points 1 day ago (46 children)

If they really want to deport foreigners they should start with the old-fashioned antisemites that mingle in those protests.

[–] rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago (18 children)

that is part of their supposed reasoning. the four are accused of chanting antisemitic things, but they dont tell u what has allegedly been chanted.

either way, deporting EU citizens who havent been committed of any crimes is very legally dubious.

deportations in general if u ask me, are morally dubious.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org -2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

who havent been committed of any crimes is very legally dubious.

TBF: as the article states, under German law it is not. Whether that is a good idea can surely be debated, but it is legal.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I seem to remember that most of the actions of the Nazis once they got into power were also legal.

Maybe, just maybe, people should have a standard of right and wrong which does not delegate that definition to "legality", especially people in Germany.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

especially people in Germany.

Why Germany especially? So far, every state of injustice declared legal whatever they wanted to do, be it Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Putin,.. or even the US, where you once could legally own people.

And of course there is always room for discussion whether things that are legal should be legal. Or illegal. But the chances of that having an effect on those four people here are rather slim.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I was born in a country which was under a Fascist dictatorship.

Not long after, there was a Revolution, the Fascist Regime was overthrown and the country became Democratic.

Still now, half a century later, people in my country of birth remain quite sensitive and easilly alarmed by practices of those in power which are similar to the kind of things that those in power in the Fascist regime would do (for example, things like civil society surveillance).

I expect exactly the same from Germans, maybe just less of it since their Fascist days have been gone for longer and (judging by my own country), people's alertness to and rejection of things "like what they used to do before" seems to fall the further away from the dictatorship days we are.

Or are you telling me that Germans are special and different from other people and hence it's wrong to expect them to have a higher tendency than those who never had Fascism to reject practices by those in power now which are similar to those of their very own past Fascist dictatorship?!

PS: That said, maybe a people who has freed itself from Fascism is significantly more sensitive to anything that bares even just a passing ressemblance to what the Fascists use to do, than a people whose Fascism was overthrown by others, in which case I was wrong in expecting Germans to have a natural rejection of Fascist practices. That being so, it would also explain just how easilly the German power elites keep on bit by bit, doing more and more things like they did in the "old days" and most of the population meekly accepts it or even defends and aplauds it.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Still now, half a century later, people in my country of birth remain quite sensitive and easilly alarmed by practices of those in power which are similar to the kind of things that those in power in the Fascist regime would do (for example, things like civil society surveillance).

I expect exactly the same from Germans, maybe just less of it since their Fascist days have been gone for longer

That's something we also thought for a long time, that we are kind of bulletproof to something like this ever happening again.

The problem/main difference to your country: yes, it's been longer ago, but also, we had reunification, where two very different places became one and defacto a large population living in a socialist dictatorship for decades had to integrate into fully-running country of the former 'class enemy'. This rift still isn't fully closed and it is something you won't find in most other countries. This lead to a smaller degree of cohesion and a larger portion of people having difficulties to identify with our national architecture.

Furthermore, the people nowadays are way more influenced by the events of the German Partition and its aftermath than the Third Reich. And even there, those that themselves experienced mass surveillance and living in a state of injustice now seem to have no problems expanding surveillance and again oppressing the enemies, as long as it's not them. In the end, people, irrespective of their nationality, can have a very short memory.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

That makes sense.

I stand corrected.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not under EU law. Freedom of movement for EU citizens is a legally binding treaty obligation.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The TFEU has a provision in section 45 that allows member states to limit this freedom, e.g. for security reasons. It will be up to a court to rule whether a sufficient reason was present in these cases, but a state can legally strip you of these rights.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's no way calling for an end to a genocide (or even a war) is sufficient reason, and they likely know that. So it is, in fact, illegal.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There’s no way calling for an end to a genocide (or even a war) is sufficient reason

Denying Israel it's existence can be a sufficient reason. But we both are merely guessing, since we all do not know what actually happened/was said.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Denying Israel it's existence can be a sufficient reason.

No it's not what the hell? Or, well, if it then the EU is doomed because that's not how a democracy is supposed to function.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It is part of the German 'reason of State', as also mentioned in the article. Hence, denying Israel it's existence is a very very bad idea in Germany.

[–] rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

staatsräson, as the article also states, is not a meaningful legal category

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago

That's what the courts will determine now, I guess.

And while Staatsräson itself might not be a meaningful legal category, chanting for the elimination of Israel's existence can already be punishable within the existing StGB, even without the currently discussed additions to it to explicitly punish calls for the elimination of nations.

[–] rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

from the article:

Buhlmann explicitly warned that the legal basis for revoking the three EU citizens’ freedom of movement was insufficient — and that deporting them would be unlawful.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago

Sorry, I read your initial sentence as in 'deporting someone who hasn't been convicted of a crime'.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (41 replies)