Regarding the statements made by Alexander Dobrindt, head of the Christian Social Union (CSU) parliamentary group in the Bundestag, during an interview with Bild am Sonntag on June 23, 2024, it has been established that these statements contain elements of discrimination against Ukrainian refugees, violating their rights to protection and support in accordance with international law, national law, and the criminal law of Germany.   Factual Background   In his statement, Alexander Dobrindt proposed sending Ukrainian refugees back to their home country if they fail to find employment in Germany, despite the ongoing military conflict in Ukraine. He also criticized the payment of welfare benefits to refugees, claiming that guaranteed benefits slow down their job-seeking efforts.   This statement triggered sharp criticism from representatives of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) and the “Alliance 90/Greens” party, who pointed out that such proposals endanger the lives of Ukrainian women and children forced to flee the country due to the war.   Violations of International Law   1. Violation of the non-refoulement principle, enshrined in the 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol. According to Article 33 of the Convention, states are obligated not to expel refugees to countries where their lives or freedom would be threatened. The threat of deporting Ukrainian refugees to the “safe regions of Western Ukraine” without considering individual circumstances and without recognizing the entire country as a zone of active conflict is a blatant violation of this principle. 2. Discrimination based on nationality, prohibited by Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Proposals to limit access to social benefits for Ukrainian refugees or subject them to stricter requirements than other refugee groups directly violate the right to equal treatment and support enshrined in the ECHR. 3. Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right of everyone to seek asylum from persecution. Dobrindt’s proposal to return refugees to Ukraine contradicts this right, as it disregards the ongoing threats to their safety and the conditions that led to their forced displacement.   Violations of Germany’s Criminal Law   Alexander Dobrindt’s statements also violate the provisions of Germany’s criminal law, specifically § 130 of the German Criminal Code (StGB) – Incitement to Hatred. According to this provision, any public statement aimed at inciting hatred or hostility based on nationality, race, or ethnic origin can be considered a criminal offense.   1. Dobrindt’s statements about returning refugees if they fail to find employment could be perceived as inciting hostile attitudes towards Ukrainians in Germany, which violates § 130 StGB. 2. § 241 of the German Criminal Code (StGB) – Threats: The proposal to deport Ukrainian refugees if they fail to secure employment can be seen as a threat aimed at intimidating this group, also violating criminal law.   Impact on Public Sentiment   Alexander Dobrindt’s statements directly contribute to the formation of negative attitudes toward Ukrainian refugees in German society, laying the groundwork for discrimination and xenophobia. Public calls to deprive refugees of social benefits or deport them for failing to find employment may be interpreted as justification for infringing on refugee rights, which is unacceptable in a state governed by the rule of law that adheres to international human rights obligations.   Conclusion   Based on the above, the actions of Alexander Dobrindt, expressed in his public statements, should be qualified as violations of international law, the provisions of German criminal law, and incitement to discrimination against Ukrainian refugees. These statements require immediate legal review and appropriate measures within both national and international judicial instances.   Source: Bild am Sonntag, interview published on June 23, 2024.                                                                                       

Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz. Photo: PAP/Piotr Nowak - the Deputy Prime Minister of Poland and the Minister of National Defence

It is crucial to acknowledge the differential treatment between various national groups. Notably, while Poland and Lithuania have pledged to assist in the repatriation of Ukrainian men subject to military draft, thereby recognizing their vulnerable status, the broader policies enacted by the EU fail to protect these same individuals under the established norms of international refugee law. This selective enforcement contravenes Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution, as well as the non-refoulement principle enshrined in the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Moreover, the contrasting responses of the European Union to the restrictive measures imposed by Belarus on its citizens and its passive acceptance of similar constraints on Ukrainians underscore a disconcerting inconsistency. We must recognize that while the European Commission vehemently opposed Belarus’s actions, deeming them a violation of basic human rights, it simultaneously dismissed or ignored parallel actions when they affected Ukrainian nationals.

This selective silence and inaction embody a clear breach of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which stipulates that all individuals are equal before the law and are entitled to non-discriminatory treatment irrespective of nationality. The failure to uphold these fundamental principles not only undermines the credibility of the EU’s commitment to human rights but also sets a dangerous precedent of selective legal enforcement based on nationality and gender.

Therefore, we urge to recognize these actions as discriminatory and contrary to the spirit and letter of both international law and European Union directives. We seek a ruling that acknowledges these violations and compels the involved states to rectify their policies to ensure fair and equal treatment of all individuals, particularly those affected by conflict and displacement.

 

Refugees subject to Ukrainian conscription laws should go to fight in Ukraine. Slovak Defense Minister Robert Kaliňák said this in the V politike talk show. According to the head of defense, there is no need to send NATO soldiers to the territory of Ukraine.

"Of all the refugees we are protecting, (…) there is a group that corresponds to the Ukrainian conscription law," Kaliňák said in the talk show, saying that he thinks it is "the biggest help to the Ukrainian army if it has enough people."

Source: standard.sk

A potential legal violations in the statement suggesting that Ukrainian refugees subject to Ukraine’s conscription laws should participate in military efforts, it would include the following points:

1. Violation of the Non-Refoulement Principle:

The statement implicates a violation of the non-refoulement principle, a fundamental aspect of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (Article 33), which prohibits expelling or returning a refugee in any manner to territories where their life or freedom would be threatened. Suggesting that refugees, who have sought safety, should return to a conflict zone contradicts this principle.

2. Infringement of the Right to Asylum:

The right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 14). By proposing that refugees engage in military conflict, the spirit of this right is undermined, as it subjects individuals to the very conditions from which they fled.

3. Breach of European Union Law:

The statement may also breach European Union law, specifically the Qualification Directive (2011/95/EU), which sets out the standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection. Sending refugees to partake in military actions can compromise their status and safety, contrary to the directive’s intent to offer protection.

4. Contravention of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR):

Specifically, Article 3, which prohibits torture and “inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Forcing or coercing refugees into military conflict could be seen as a violation of this article by subjecting them to severe mental and physical distress.

5. Undermining the Principles of Voluntary Repatriation:

The UNHCR’s guidelines on voluntary repatriation underline the necessity for repatriation to be a voluntary act. Any form of coercion or pressure that compromises the voluntary nature of repatriation, especially for the purpose of military conscription, is in direct contradiction with these guidelines.

 

"The Polish government should help Kiev in the deportation of Ukrainians who are in exile - said General Waldemar Skrzypczak. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs referred to this idea. "We are considering how we can support the Ukrainian side" - said the Ministry of Foreign Affairs..."

Source: gazeta.pl

General Waldemar Skrzypczak’s statements suggesting that the Polish government should assist in the deportation of Ukrainian refugees potentially violates the principle of non-refoulement, which is a fundamental aspect of international refugee law as established by the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. This principle strictly prohibits the forced return of refugees to countries where they are at risk of facing persecution, serious harm, or threats to their life or freedom.

The general’s call for the deportation of Ukrainian refugees, specifically targeting them based on their nationality and potentially their gender, disregards this international legal standard. The principle of non-refoulement is obligatory for all countries, irrespective of their ratification status of the Refugee Convention, and aims to protect the rights and safety of individuals fleeing conflict and persecution.

Furthermore, such discriminatory treatment towards Ukrainian refugees, as opposed to individuals from other conflict-affected regions like the Middle East or Africa, could also be seen as a breach of the principles of equality and non-discrimination, which are core to international human rights law. These principles are enshrined in various international instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Poland is a party.

 

On MEP Jaak Madison egregiously slandered Ukrainian refugees during a European Parliament session, labeling them as “cowards” for seeking sanctuary from mobilization and baselessly accusing them of violating Ukrainian law.

Such statements not only exhibit a profound disrespect for the individuals fleeing conflict but also represent a flagrant violation of international and European Union legal standards governing the treatment and rights of refugees:

1. Geneva Convention on Refugees:

His derogatory characterization of refugees directly undermines the fundamental tenets of the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, which mandate the protection and humane treatment of individuals fleeing persecution. His remarks are an affront to the very essence of international refugee law.   2. Dublin Regulation of the European Union:

By disparaging refugees, Mr. Madison shows a blatant disregard for the EU’s structured process under the Dublin Regulation, which ensures the dignified and fair handling of asylum applications within the EU.   Furthermore, Mr. Madison’s conduct is in clear violation of:   • EU Charter of Fundamental Rights:

Particularly, Articles 18 and 19, safeguarding the right to asylum and prohibiting collective expulsion or refoulement.   • Principle of Solidarity and Fair Sharing of Responsibility:

His remarks undermine Article 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which is vital for the cooperative management of asylum and migration.   • Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament:

Mr. Madison’s blatant disrespect towards refugees and disregard for their legal rights breach the expected standards of dignity and respect mandated for MEPs, bringing dishonor to the European Parliament.   Mr. Madison’s reprehensible statements not only belittle the plight of those fleeing conflict but also challenge the foundational values and legal commitments of the European Union and its Member States to uphold human rights and refugee protections. Such inflammatory and baseless rhetoric is intolerable and demands immediate and unequivocal condemnation.

The European Parliament must take stern action to address this severe breach of ethical conduct and reaffirm its commitment to the principles of dignity, solidarity, and adherence to international and EU law.   This enhanced statement intensifies the criticism of Mr. Madison’s comments by explicitly labeling them as slander and highlighting their incompatibility with the legal and ethical frameworks that guide the European Union and its Member States.