This populist project unjustifiably infringes on the fundamental rights of refugees and is neither objective nor appropriate.
Last week, the Bavarian cabinet decided to introduce a payment card for refugees. The plan is intended to reduce "incentives for immigration and the financing of human trafficking." Furthermore, Bavaria aims to be a pioneer in implementing the decisions made at the federal-state summit in early November.
The RAV (Regional Employment Association) views the plan as populist symbolic politics and criticizes the significant infringement on the fundamental rights of those affected. "The right to informational self-determination is particularly affected," says lawyer Yunus Ziyal from the RAV's Southern Migration Law Working Group. "Collecting data on their purchases would allow for the monitoring of migrants, which would also enable the creation of movement profiles."
The lawyer further explains: “There is also a risk of significant restrictions on general freedom of action if certain goods are blocked and regional restrictions are imposed, and we fear serious violations of our clients' data protection rights, especially with the hasty implementation here in Bavaria.”
Furthermore, the proposal is neither factually sound nor appropriate: According to migration lawyers, smugglers are generally not paid after the escape, and those affected usually only support their relatives abroad once they themselves are working and earning money. This is also a primary concern of those affected: independence from social welfare benefits.
Furthermore, there is no reliable source that confirms cash payments as a pull factor for migration. Migration research (*) questions the schematic system of pull/push factors as an explanation for migration decisions and instead emphasizes the importance of the rule of law, which – at least on paper – applies to everyone.
The planned restrictions would ultimately disenfranchise those affected, particularly in the area of food, if certain food products – for example, African ones – could only be purchased in specialty shops in Munich or Nuremberg, while refugees are often housed in rural communities. Furthermore, if those affected are identifiable as asylum seekers at every checkout, online purchases are impossible, and "certain retailers" are to be excluded, this will result in further discrimination and stigmatization. The payment card system would mean that no purchases could be made outside of major retailers. This would affect, among other things, events such as Christmas markets or school festivals, purchases from street vendors, private purchases of used goods, public transport tickets, and toilet fees. The opposite of integration would be the consequence.
It is also unclear how payments are to be made for obtaining personal documents from one's home country, which are regularly requested by immigration authorities, or how people are to finance their legal representation. The vast majority of asylum seekers pay their fees themselves; legal aid is regularly denied.
The lawyers at the RAV (Regional Lawyers' Association) consider the massive infringements on the rights to freedom of action, informational self-determination, data protection, and freedom of movement to be unjustified. They urge the Bavarian state government to abandon this populist knee-jerk reaction and instead focus on legally and practically sound solutions.
* For example, Oliviero Angeli, scientific coordinator of the Mercator Forum Migration and Democracy (MIDEM) at the Technical University of Dresden.
