Munich, July 2 – In a significant development, a Munich administrative court has ruled that identity checks conducted at the German-Austrian border in 2025 were unlawful. This decision comes after several individuals, including a prominent European law professor, challenged the legality of these controls, which have been in place since September 2024.
Court Deems Controls Unlawful in Three Cases
The administrative court found in favor of three plaintiffs, including Werner Schroeder, a professor of European law at the University of Innsbruck. Schroeder recounted an incident where federal police officers searched his bag after he refused to show identification during a train journey from Munich to Innsbruck. He stated that he had previously encountered similar controls, even alongside a European Court of Justice judge, and consistently viewed them as illegal under the Schengen Agreement.
The court’s primary consideration was the prolonged duration of these border controls, particularly at the Austrian-German border, and their compatibility with the new Schengen Borders Code. Germany reintroduced border controls at all its state borders on September 16, 2024, a measure ordered by the Federal Ministry of the Interior to curb irregular entries. These controls have been extended three times, most recently until mid-September 2026.
Professor’s Plea for Preventive Injunction Rejected
While Schroeder successfully argued that the past control was unlawful, his request for a preventive injunction, which would exempt him from future controls, was rejected. As a weekly commuter between Munich and Innsbruck, Schroeder sought to avoid repeated checks. However, the court stated that citizens must initially tolerate state interventions and can only challenge their legality retrospectively. Interim legal protection is granted only in exceptional circumstances where irreparable and significant damage is imminent.
Schroeder’s lawyer indicated that they would consider an appeal against this decision to the Bavarian Administrative Court if the reasons for the judgment are unfavorable. The current legal framework means that even if a control is retrospectively deemed inadmissible, it does not prevent future controls, a situation Schroeder describes as a “legal loophole.”
Other Plaintiffs Allege Political Arbitrariness and Racial Profiling
Two other men also successfully challenged the border controls. One of them, Austrian lawyer Hubert Niedermayr, who was repeatedly checked in the Rosenheim border area, believes that existing law is being deliberately violated. “This is ultimately political arbitrariness, and we cannot tolerate that,” Niedermayr stated.
Another plaintiff, Abdulhamid A., a Nigerian national, accused the police of racial profiling, suggesting he was targeted primarily due to his skin color.
Federal Ministry of the Interior Maintains Stance
Despite multiple court rulings, including a similar decision by the Bavarian Administrative Court in April concerning a woman commuting between Vienna and Munich, the Federal Ministry of the Interior continues to uphold the controversial measures. The Bavarian Administrative Court had previously ruled that four controls of the plaintiff were unlawful and that the extension of border controls by the Federal Ministry of the Interior was not justified according to the provisions of the Schengen Borders Code and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). However, this decision did not address future cases.
The ongoing legal challenges highlight a persistent tension between national security concerns and the principles of free movement within the Schengen Area. The legal community continues to scrutinize the application of border controls and their compliance with European law.
Source: https://www.traunsteiner-tagblatt.de/region/nachrichten-aus-bayern_artikel,-muenchner-klagt-gegen-grenzkontrollen-_arid,1004328.html
