New position to push forward deportations
According to several media outlets, including Der Spiegel and Die Zeit, diplomat Ludwig Jung will take on the newly created role of migration ambassador on January 19. According to the Federal Ministry of the Interior, Jung most recently worked at the Foreign Office and is now moving to the Interior Ministry.
Its task will be to coordinate the repatriation of persons without valid residence permits. A particular focus will be on so-called "innovative solutions." This refers primarily to deportations to third countries when repatriation to the country of origin is not possible or difficult to enforce.
What is behind the third-country model?
Specifically, this involves a model in which rejected asylum seekers are taken to countries outside the EU. There, either their asylum procedures are to be continued or preparations are to be made for their subsequent return to their countries of origin. According to the federal government, Germany is holding talks with other EU member states on this issue.
The aim of this strategy is to limit irregular migration and increase the number of deportations. At the same time, incentives for onward travel to Germany are to be reduced.
However, experts have expressed considerable doubts. Many migration experts consider such third-country solutions to be legally problematic, particularly with regard to European asylum law and international refugee law.
Ambassador replaces former special representative
The new migration ambassador succeeds a former special position in the Ministry of the Interior. Under the previous federal government, there was aspecial representative for migration agreements. This role was most recently held by FDP politician Joachim Stamp. His mandate ended when his contract expired at the end of 2025.
Stamp was primarily responsible for negotiating agreements with countries of origin. These agreements concerned both the return of rejected asylum seekers and legal channels for labor migration. During his tenure, agreements were concluded with Morocco, Georgia, Uzbekistan, Kenya, and Colombia, among others.
The EU is planning new rules for so-called "safe third countries." In the future, asylum seekers could be sent back even if they have only minor or indirect connections to a third country. What does this mean for asylum seekers?
Criticism from the SPD
The new approach has been met with criticism within the governing parties. SPD member of the Bundestag Hakan Demir expressed his doubts about the approach to the German Press Agency (dpa). He emphasized that migration should not be reduced to deportations alone.
Germany is facing a growing shortage of skilled workers, for example in public transport and healthcare. Migration also means labor migration, family reunification, and humanitarian responsibility. Against this backdrop, it is questionable whether focusing on a "deportation ambassador" is the right political approach.
CSU calls for significantly more deportations from 2026 onwards
The new position is the result of an initiative by Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU). His goal is to significantly increase the number of deportations, citing the coalition agreement between the CDU/CSU and SPD.
It provides for the resumption of regular deportations to Afghanistan and Syria, initially targeting criminals and dangerous individuals. However, the political debate has recently also focused on the deportation of people with uncertain residence status if the original reason for protection no longer applies.
At its closed-door meeting last week, the CSU announced its intention to further restrict irregular migration. Discussions also focused on the possibility of subjecting the protection status of certain groups of people, such as those with subsidiary protection, to more rigorous checks in future.
In addition, the CSU put forward proposals such as a dedicated deportation terminal at Munich Airport, nationwide departure centers, and stricter rules on EU freedom of movement. Other demands include automatic loss of protection status when traveling to the country of origin and tougher consequences for criminal offenses.
Human rights concerns regarding repatriations
Significant criticism has come from the scientific community. Migration expert Petra Bendel warned the Nürnberger Nachrichten newspaper that the current plans could violate important principles of refugee protection. She said that the security situation in Syria remains unstable and that the supply of medical aid, electricity, and water is not guaranteed in many places.
Systematic deportations to countries with an uncertain human rights situation could violate the principle of non-refoulement. This principle of international law prohibits the return of people to countries where they face persecution, torture, or inhumane treatment.
What does the new migration ambassador mean for migrants in Germany?
For migrants and asylum seekers, the appointment of the migration ambassador does not immediately change anything. The new position is primarily political and strategic in nature. It does not create new deportation rights nor does it replace existing laws.
Deportations may continue to take place only under the existing legal conditions. Residence permit, protection status, or temporary suspensions of deportation may not be revoked across the board, but only after a mandatory individual review by the competent authority.
The central protective mechanisms remain in place: deportation is only possible if there is no legal prohibition on deportation and no longer any right of residence.
In addition, Germany is bound by national asylum law, EU law, and international law—including theEU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Geneva Convention on Refugees, and the principle of non-refoulement.
This also applies to deportations via third countries. These are only permitted under strict conditions: the country in question must be considered safe, be willing to accept the person, and protect the individual rights of the person concerned.
Blanket or automated solutions are legally inadmissible. Courts—most recently the European Court of Justice —have clarified that individual review and the possibility of judicial review must always exist.
