What was the case about?
The case involved a single mother from Eritrea and her child. Both had entered Germany in 2017 and applied for asylum. They were later granted a Tolerance permit. A Tolerance permit not a Residence permit, but merely means that deportation is temporarily suspended.
Since mid-2018, the mother and child had no longer been living in an initial reception center, but in their own apartment in Lower Saxony. They received basic benefits under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act totaling 1,096 euros per month. In addition, monthly amounts were deducted to cover electricity costs.
The woman believed the benefits were too low. She argued that the minimum subsistence level necessary for a dignified existence was not adequately guaranteed. After she filed a lawsuit, several courts heard the case. Ultimately, the case reached the Federal Constitutional Court, the highest court in the land.
What are basic benefits under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act?
The Asylum Seekers Benefits Act governs the provision of support to certain foreign nationals who are unable to support themselves. This may include, for example, asylum seekers, individuals holding a Tolerance permit , and people who are subject to an enforceable order to leave the country.
During the initial period of their stay in Germany, many of those affected receive what are known as basic benefits. These are intended to cover essential needs, such as food, clothing, housing, personal hygiene, and other daily necessities.
The legislature justifies the lower benefits by noting that these individuals’ residency status is often still uncertain during the initial period. Therefore, their needs in certain areas may be less than those of people who live in Germany permanently.
So-called "analog benefits" can only be paid after a certain period of residence has elapsed. Analog benefits are still considered benefits under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act. However, their amount and scope are more closely aligned with regular social assistance.
Currently, eligibility for social benefits generally requires 36 months of uninterrupted residence in Germany. In 2018, this waiting period was still 15 months.
Is that what the court ruled?
The Federal Constitutional Court ruled that providing lower levels of benefits to asylum seekers and tolerated persons during the initial period of their stay is, in principle, consistent with the Basic Law. The legislature may therefore assume that residency is not yet permanently secured during this period. Consequently, it may assess certain needs differently than it does for persons who have been residing in Germany for a longer period of time.
The court thus confirmed that the state is not required to pay benefits at the social assistance level from the outset.
However, the court also made it clear that human dignity applies to all people. The state must therefore always ensure a minimum standard of living that is consistent with human dignity. This includes not only food, clothing, and shelter, but also a minimum level of social and cultural participation. According to the court, benefits must be calculated in a transparent manner and must not fall below the minimum standard of living.
In the case of the plaintiff from Eritrea, the court nevertheless ruled that she had been underpaid for a certain period (September 1, 2018, to August 20, 2019). The reason: The amount of her benefits was based on outdated data.
The court therefore ruled that benefits intended to ensure a minimum standard of living must be regularly updated. If the costs of food, clothing, personal hygiene, or other basic necessities change, the legislature must respond accordingly. This also applies to benefits under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act and to basic income support during the first 36 months of residence.
What does this decision mean for other affected individuals?
The decision makes it clear that lawmakers mustregularly review and update the level of benefits provided to asylum seekers and individuals with a Tolerance permit . Even for people without a secure right of residence, a decent standard of living must be guaranteed.
However, the resolution also states that asylum seekers and individuals with a Tolerance permit not automatically entitled to full social assistance during the initial period of their stay. Lower basic benefits are lawful if their residency status is still uncertain. Only after 36 months of continuous residence are those affected eligible to receive higher benefits.
For those affected, the ruling is therefore a mixed bag. While the court confirms that reduced benefits under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act are generally permitted, it also makes clear that the government must calculate these benefits carefully and take current living costs into account.
