Case: Asylum application after the fall of the Assad regime
The claimant came to Germany in October 2023 and applied for asylum here. In April 2025, the BAMF rejected his application and threatened to deport him to Syria. The reason given was that the situation in Syria had changed fundamentally following the fall of President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024.
The man appealed against the rejection of his asylum application to the administrative court in May 2025. But without success - the court confirmed the BAMF's decision.
Court: No danger from persecution or war in Syria
According to the judges, the plaintiff is no longer threatened with political persecution in his home country. Neither the new transitional government in Damascus nor the Kurdish-dominated self-administration in Hasaka would threaten him. According to the court, he is also not at risk from fighting or arbitrary violence in his home region.
Although there are still conflicts in Syria, most recently in the south between the Druze and Bedouins, the court made it clear that there is currently no individual danger for the plaintiff from Hasaka.
Living with family and return assistance possible
The plaintiff was also unable to claim economic hardship in court. The judges found that the man and his wife could live with his family free of charge. In addition, he would be able to earn his ownliving, at least in part, by working. In addition, he would be entitled to state return assistance in the form of cash and non-cash benefits if he left Germany voluntarily.
In the longer term, the court even assessed the economic development in Syria as cautiously positive: wages had risen, while food prices had recently fallen.
What asylum rules applied to Syrians in the past?
Looking back: At the beginning of the Syrian civil war in 2011, refugees from Syria were granted asylum or refugee protection in Germany under the Geneva Refugee Convention. The situation in the country was considered so dangerous that any return was associated with political persecution, torture or even mortal danger - regardless of the personal situation. The BAMF recognized the need for protection of Syrian nationals during this time in a shortened procedure.
This practice changed from the end of 2015. In view of the assessment that not all Syrians are individually persecuted, the BAMF increasingly only granted subsidiary protection. This differs significantly from refugee status, for example in terms of family reunification or the right of residence.
Between 2017 and 2018, the BAMF again suspended asylum decisions altogether. It was not until 2021 that the office again individually examined whether refugee protection, subsidiary protection or protection against deportation was justified.
Asylum for refugees from Syria after change of power
This changed again after the end of the civil war. With the fall of the former ruler Assad in December 2024, the BAMF once again suspended asylum decisions for Syrians.
The background to this was § 24 para. 5 AsylG: If the situation in the country of origin is unclear, the decision may be temporarily postponed. The measure affected around 47,270 open asylum applications from Syrian refugees, including around 46,000 initial applications.
It was not until May 2025 that the Administrative Court in Karlsruhe ruled that this suspension was no longer justified. Since then, the BAMF has been actively examining refugees again - but no longer automatically positive: the protection status now depends heavily on the region of origin and the individual situation.
Conclusion: What does the ruling mean for Syrian refugees in Germany?
The ruling from Cologne confirms the BAMF's practice: Syrians have no fundamental right to protection in Germany. Whether asylum or another protection status is granted now depends on the individual situation and the region of origin - each case must be justified individually.
For many of those affected, this means longer examination procedures, unclear prospects and delays in family reunification. If the application is rejected, the worst case scenario is deportation.
The German government has also announced that it will implement deportations more consistently in future. The coalition agreement states that deportations to Syria should be possible in principle - "starting with criminals and those posing a risk". While the first deportations to Afghanistan have already taken place, no specific deportations to Syria are known to date.
The judgment from Cologne is not yet legally binding. The plaintiff can appeal to the Higher Administrative Court. It therefore remains to be seen whether higher courts will agree with this assessment or whether the situation in Syria will be assessed differently in the future.
