Gift vouchers under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act in Göttingen

Discretionary considerations when issuing vouchers instead of cash within the framework of benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG)

In the first week of December this year, 19 refugees, ranging in age from 8 months to 76 years, have so far sought assistance from the Hildesheim Social Court, which has jurisdiction over Göttingen, regarding the manner in which benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) are granted. In the city and district of Göttingen, these benefits are not provided in cash, as is customary elsewhere, but rather in the form of vouchers. 

The refugees from the entire area of ​​the district and the city of Göttingen have in some cases been living in their places of residence for more than a decade and yet still receive the stigmatizing and discriminatory vouchers.

In Germany, the vast majority of states and districts currently provide cash benefits under Section 3 Paragraph 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), rather than vouchers. In a ruling on the AsylbLG dated July 18, 2012 (Case Nos. 1 BvL 10/10 and 1 BvL 2/11), the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) stated that migration policy considerations must not play a role in securing a minimum standard of living. However, the vouchers had been introduced at that time solely for migration policy reasons.

Nevertheless, the city and district of Göttingen follow the position of the Lower Saxony Ministry of the Interior, which presents vouchers as the only option. It is implied that, within the framework of the so-called principle of benefits in kind, the issuance of vouchers instead of cash is mandatory according to Section 3 Paragraph 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG).

In the author's opinion, this has been legally untenable at least since the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of 18 July 2012. 

A legal opinion from our law firm is intended to strengthen the position of those who are also advocating for the abolition of the voucher system within the administrations of the city and district of Göttingen. This opinion is now available here in full text.

Statement - Cash instead of vouchers(PDF)

Legal opinion from December 2012 regarding discretionary considerations when issuing vouchers instead of cash within the framework of benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG).
File format: PDF – Size: 111.2 KB – Uploaded: December 6, 2012

In a press release dated December 6, 2012, the law firm Sven Adam stated the following regarding the publication:

In the dispute over the form of benefits granted under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in the Göttingen area, further urgent legal proceedings are now pending before the Hildesheim Social Court. A total of 19 refugees, ranging in age from 8 months to 76 years, have thus claimed the right to receive cash instead of vouchers.


Although some have lived in their communities in the city and district of Göttingen for more than a decade, they still receive these stigmatizing and discriminatory vouchers.

The vast majority of states and districts in Germany now provide cash benefits under Section 3 Paragraph 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), not vouchers. This applies across the board in Berlin, Bremen, Hamburg, Hesse, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, and Saxony-Anhalt, and with only a few exceptions in Schleswig-Holstein, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Brandenburg, Saxony, and Thuringia. It is therefore incomprehensible why the cosmopolitan city and district of Göttingen, of all places, cling to this racist practice. In its ruling of July 18, 2012, concerning the level of benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) emphasized that migration policy considerations must not play a role in securing a minimum standard of living.

“Before taking legal action, we offered, within a specified timeframe, to exchange the vouchers already issued for December for cash. This offer was met with either no response or a rejection,” explains attorney Sven Adam, describing the attempts at an out-of-court settlement. The plaintiffs he represents hope that these proceedings will also send a signal to those in the city and district administrations who are advocating for the abolition of the voucher system. “It is at the discretion of the administrations whether they issue cash or vouchers. The claim that issuing vouchers is mandatory in Göttingen is incorrect,” Adam states, addressing the core of the legal dispute. In a comprehensive statement, he examined the various legal arguments and concluded that issuing cash, rather than the administratively and costly vouchers, is the only legally compliant way to provide benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG). Therefore, the authorities must exercise their discretion in the best interests of those affected and abandon the voucher system.
 

We welcome any criticism and suggestions regarding the legal opinion, which can be sent via email to kontakt@anwaltskanzlei-adam.de .

The counter-statement may be used, distributed, and published free of charge (sic!). This page can be linked to using the following address:

https://anwaltskanzlei-adam.de/wertgutscheine-nach-asylblg-in-goettingen/