The objection of the Kurdish refugee, whose asylum application was rejected by the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF), has been upheld by the Osnabrück Administrative Court, who accepted the application on the basis of unlawful decisions in Turkey.
Refugees with a political (e.g. pro-Kurdish ) background were routinely transferred to other places quite rapidly. However, a Kurdish refugee who applied for asylum in Germany because of the penalties imposed by Turkey in 2017, was rejected by BAMF because they concluded that “the Turkish government has upheld the rule of law”, according to Özgür Politika News.
The Kurdish refugee, who carried the BAMF decision to the administrative court, stated that he did not commit any illegal actions, and he participated in Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) activities even though he was not a member of the HDP, and for this he was sentenced to 14 years. Turkey has been in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, he said, adding that Kurds in Turkey were subjected to degrading treatment.
Osnabrück Administrative Court, assessing the overall situation and circumstances of the proceedings Kurdish refugees in Turkey, found BAMF’s decision “unlawful” and decided that the applicant should be “granted asylum”.
In the reasoning of the court decision, it was declared that the “judiciary is not independent” in Turkey. The court decision also drew attention to the situation after the 15 July intra-state conflict: “Since the coup attempt, especially in the trials involving allegations of membership of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP-C) and the Gülen Movement (FETÖ), only a limited legal trial can be conducted”.
The administrative court’s decision emphasised that in cases relating to the PKK, DHKP-C and FETÖ the judiciary cannot decide independently. In the decision, it was noted that the Turkish judiciary used the definition of “fight against terrorism” very broadly, and the Kurdish refugee who was the subject of the case was probably not going to be given a fair trial due to his political stance.
