The Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) produced the National Implementation Plan (NIP) in December 2024.[1] Following the parliamentary elections in February 2025 and the formation of a new government, two legislative texts were proposed by the cabinet in September 2025 to apply the Pact rules in Germany, namely the CEAS Adjustment Act (GEAS Anpassungsgesetz) and the CEAS Adjustment Companion Act (GEAS-Anpassungsfolgegesetz).
After deliberations in the relevant parliamentary committees, the German parliament voted in favour of the CEAS Adjustment Act and the CEAS Adjustment Companion Act in February 2026.[2] 309 parliamentarians voted in favour, 260 against the draft legislation, 2 abstained.[3] In March 2026, the Bundesrat approved the Acts as well. The changes are set to take effect in June 2026.
passage of the CEAS Adjustment Act through the German Bundestag proved highly contentious, with sharp divisions among political parties and civil society actors.[4] In parliamentary debate, critics from across the spectrum attacked the bill’s substance and implications: some opposition lawmakers condemned it as ineffective or as abandoning core asylum protections, while human rights organizations and expert bodies warned that elements of the draft risked undermining constitutional and international safeguards, particularly for vulnerable groups, and that implementation measures are more restrictive than the EU reform requires.[5] Supporters within the governing coalition argued the legislation was necessary to provide legal clarity and align national law with the upcoming EU-wide CEAS requirements, but the intense and polarized discussion underscored deep controversy over the direction of German asylum policy.[6]
Below is an overview of the main changes that are introduced by the CEAS Adjustment Act:
Screening:
Third-country nationals who do not fulfil entry conditions and who are apprehended in connection with an unauthorised crossing of the external border, are disembarked followingng a search and rescue operation or apply for international protection at a border crossing point of transit zone will be subject to screening under Regulation (EU) 2024/1356 (Screening Regulation). Persons who have evaded border controls and who are apprehended within the territory are subject to a shorter inland screening procedure. Screening includes identification and verification of identity, security checks as well as preliminary health and vulnerability checks, collection of biometric data, and registration in EURODAC, which is being expanded into a comprehensive migration database storing biometric, identity, and travel document information to improve monitoring of migratory movements.[7]
A new detention possibility – with no equivalent under current German or EU law – is foreseen for the screening phase at the external border, introduced by the Screening Regulation. The government’s CEAS Adaptation Act provides for deprivation of liberty or restriction of freedom of movement during the screening procedure itself (proposed §§ 14a–15a Residence Act), including a Verbringen (transfer to a location for the purpose of external border screening, § 14a(1) Residence Act), Überprüfungshaft (detention during external border screening, § 14a(2) Residence Act), Festhalten detention during inland screening, § 15a(1) Residence Act), and a further Überprüfungshaft for inland screening (§ 15a(2) Residence Act). Since the screening procedure does not exist under current CEAS law, this constitutes a genuinely new category of liberty restriction that goes beyond anything presently possible under German or EU law. The NIP highlights that the Federal Police will bear primary responsibility for carrying out screening at external borders – in Germany, predominantly at airports and seaports – and that decisions on facility locations, technical equipment, and staff training are urgently required. PRO ASYL raises significant concerns about this framework. It argues that detention during screening should only ever be applied as a last resort, and that clear alternatives to detention – such as reporting obligations – should be established in legislation, as required by recital 11 and the definition of detention in Article 2(12) of the Screening Regulation. PRO ASYL further argues that, in particular for inland screening, there is no justification for restricting freedom of movement, as persons subject to inland screening are seeking to undergo their asylum procedure in Germany and are therefore not at risk of absconding. The draft legislation also restricts access to advisory organisations in screening facilities under certain circumstances (proposed §§ 14a(4), 15a(5) Residence Act), a provision PRO ASYL criticises as incompatible with the right to an effective remedy under Article 19(4) of the Basic Law, Article 13 ECHR, and Article 47(2) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.[8]
Border procedure:
The envisioned legal adjustments aim at introducing a mandatory border asylum procedure[9] and envisage several fundamental changes.[10] One central feature is the national codification of border asylum procedures (§ 18a Asylum Act), which will extend beyond existing airport asylum processes to cover a wider range of cases specified under the reform.[11] Beyond the mandatory application of the border procedure to certain categories of people (Article 45 Asylum Procedures Regulation), Germany has decided to also introduce the possibility to apply the border procedure in instances which the Pact includes as an option for Member States to consider (Article 43(1) Asylum Procedures Regulation).
Detention:
The act introduces new forms of detention, including asylum and return detention at borders, raising concerns about disproportionate interference with fundamental rights.[12] Additionally, the law ties these restrictions to severe cuts in social benefits to pressure individuals into “voluntary” departure. These measures have sparked extensive criticism from human rights organisations for their harshness and for their potential violations of constitutional and EU law provisions.[13]
- Secondary migration centres:
The CEAS Adjustment Act is set to significantly restrict the freedom of movement for refugees and asylum seekers. The Act allows authorities to prohibit individuals from leaving reception centres and newly established secondary migration centres for extended periods, based on a broad assumption of flight risk that applicants must disprove.[14] This presumption applies generally to persons in Dublin proceedings, i.e. while authorities are determining which EU Member State is responsible for their asylum procedure. Residents (including families with minor children) may be prohibited from leaving, including through overnight curfews, amounting to de facto detention without the legal safeguards applicable to formal detention. The establishment of these centres is not required by the Pact, the German government chose to introduce this restrictive element. Baden-Württemberg and Lower Saxony have already announced plans to establish such facilities. Concerns have been raised about the compatibility of this restriction with the EU Reception Conditions Directive’s requirement to maintain a standard of living in conformity with international obligations.
- Asylverfahrenshaft (detention during the asylum procedure)
The Asylverfahrenshaft will be set out in proposed §§ 69–70a of the Asylum Act in the government’s CEAS Adaptation Act (GEAS-Anpassungsgesetz) as a new form of detention. Unlike all pre-existing forms of detention under German law, which are anchored in the Residence Act and ordered in the context of pending removal, this new detention form may be ordered while an asylum procedure is still ongoing – including in the regular procedure, the accelerated procedure, the border procedure, and the return border procedure (§ 70b Asylum Act). The NIP confirms that the government has selectively transposed those grounds from the new Reception Conditions Directive (EU) 2024/1346 (Article 10 ff.) for which it sees a “practical scope of application”, applying the ultima ratio principle.[15] Asylverfahrenshaft, is, unlike pre-removal detention under § 62(1) of the Residence Act, not subject to the existing prohibition on detaining minors and families with minor children.[16] Under the proposed § 70a(3) Asylum Act, minors may exceptionally be detained together with a detained parent or, in the case of unaccompanied minors, where detention is found to be in the child’s best interest. Germany’s National Implementation Plan reflects this framing, stating that minors will “in principle not be detained, except where this serves their best interests.” Civil society organisations, including PRO ASYL and the Flüchtlingsrat Baden-Württemberg, have sharply criticised these provisions as incompatible with Article 37 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which, according to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, prohibits all immigration detention of children without exception.[17] Neither the NIP nor the government’s legislative materials address this tension in substantive terms.
The German Institute for Human Rights (DIMR) argues that the proposed law significantly expands the scope for restricting the freedom and basic rights of asylum seekers and for detaining them far beyond what is mandatory under EU law, leading to serious human-rights risks. The DIMR cautions that these far-reaching provisions – including extensive new grounds for detention and restrictions on liberty – constitute major intrusions into fundamental rights such as personal freedom and the ability to lead a self-determined life, raising constitutional and human-rights concerns that are not justified by the requirements of the CEAS reform alone. It underscores that the law’s expansion of detention powers, including procedures tied to the border procedures, lacks sufficient safeguards and could disproportionately affect vulnerable groups unless the scope of these measures is strictly limited to the minimum required by EU law.[18] PRO ASYL criticises the draft for failing to incorporate key procedural guarantees from the new Reception Conditions Directive (Art. 11), including the obligation to explain why less coercive alternatives cannot be used, and for omitting the opening prohibition against detention based solely on an applicant’s status or nationality.
Access of legal advisors:
The CEAS Adaptation Act (proposed § 12c Asylum Act), implementing Article 18(3) and Article 30(3) of the Asylum Procedures Regulation, authorises access restrictions for legal advisers (though not for legal representatives) to detention facilities and border checkpoints where this is “objectively necessary” for security, order, or the functioning of the facility, provided that access is not thereby “substantially impeded or made impossible.” While legal representatives (Rechtsvertreter) are explicitly exempted from such restrictions, the provision introduces a formal legal basis for limiting access by NGO counsellors and legal advice organisations – a role currently filled on a largely voluntary basis in most German detention facilities.
Monitoring mechanism:
The CEAS Adjustment Act includes the provision of establishing a monitoring mechanism for both screening and border procedures. The mechanism has been introduced by amendments through the Bundestag.[19] It will be managed by the German Institute for Human Rights and the National Agency for the Prevention of Torture.[20] The manager and staff for the monitoring mechanism are being recruited as of April 2026.
Cessation of status:
The CEAS Adaptation Act introduces EU citizenship as a new automatic cessation ground for international protection status (§ 72) and simultaneously excludes judicial review in such cases, meaning no court appeal is possible where cessation occurs solely on this basis.
Access to statutory health insurance:
Under § 44 Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act, access to statutory health insurance equivalent will be extended to all minors receiving basic Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act benefits.
Other developments in relation to the Implementation of the Pact:
Solidarity:
In December 2025, Germany made the largest pledge within the newly established annual solidarity pool in line with what has been calculated to correspond to the “fair share” for Germany. Germany committed to 4,555 “relocation” places out of a total 8,921 pledged by eight member states across the EU for 2026. This pledge occurred against a backdrop in which the EU’s overall relocation ambition had been progressively reduced from an initial 30,000 people per year to just over 20,000. However, Germany’s interior ministry confirmed that none of its pledged 4,555 places constitute actual relocations from states such as Italy or Greece; instead, they take the form of alternative support. Specifically, Germany has agreed with Greece and Italy to assume responsibility for processing the asylum claims of 4,555 people who first entered those countries but later travelled on to Germany, offsetting what the German Interior Ministry describes as its burden from past secondary movements under the Dublin system. While EU rules formally prioritise relocations over other forms of solidarity, Germany was permitted in December 2025 to switch this priority as part of broader political compromises to operationalise the EU’s first annual solidarity mechanism, which aims to ensure “burden-sharing among member states facing high migratory pressure”.[21]
Provision of legal counselling:
In March 2026, news broke that the government is planning to end its funding for independent legal counselling which was introduced in 2023.[22] This will have a significant impact on the asylum system in Germany. According to information provided by the BAMF in February 2026, a total of 195 independent legal counselling (AVB) projects were funded in 2024, including 33 projects providing specialized legal advice for vulnerable asylum seekers. In 2025, 172 AVB projects received funding, of which 23 focused on vulnerable groups. The decision was criticised by a variety of different actors.[23]
[1] Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI), National Implementation Plan (December 2024) available in German here.
[2] German Parliament, ‘Bundestag macht Weg für Reform des Europäischen Asylsystems frei‘, 27 February 2026, available in German here. The law is available on this website.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Deutscher Bundestag ‘Kontroverse um Umsetzung des Gemeinsamen Europäischen Asylsystems‘, 9 October 2025, available in German here.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] PRO ASYL, GEAS-Umsetzung in Deutschland: Mit voller Härte, 16 September 2025, available in German here.
[9] Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI), National Implementation Plan (December 2024) available in German here.
[10] Act to Adapt National Law to the Reform of the Common European Asylum System (GEAS Adjustment Act) (Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Anpassung des nationalen Rechts an die Reform des Gemeinsamen Europäischen Asylsystems), draft bill, not yet promulgated, for the most up to date status of the draft act, see https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/gesetzgebungsverfahren/DE/MI4/GEAS_01.html.
[11] Ibid., p. 5.
[12] Ibid; Amnesty International, ‘Stellungnahme zum Gesetzentwurf zur Anpassung des nationalen Rechts an die Reform des gemeinsamen Europäischen Asylsystems (GEAS-Anpassungsgesetz in der Fassung vom 24.06.2025)’ (08 July 2025), available here.
[13] Ibid; Annika Fischer‑Uebler, ‘Wenig Freiheit, wenig Schutz: Das GEAS‑Anpassungsgesetz aus grund‑ und menschenrechtlicher Perspektive’ (Verfassungsblog, 4 September 2025), available here; Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte, ‘Stellungnahme zum Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Anpassung des nationalen Rechts an die Reform des Gemeinsamen Europäischen Asylsystems (GEAS‑Anpassungsgesetz)’ (July 2025), available here; Annika Fischer-Ueberl, ‘Schlechte Aussichten für Geflüchtete‘ (Verfassungsblog, 13 March 2026), available here.
[14] PRO ASYL, ‘GEAS-Umsetzung in Deutschland: Mit voller Härte’ (16 September 2025), available here.
[15] Federal Ministry of the Interior, National Implementation Plan, 20 December 2024, available in German here.
[16] Flüchtlingsrat Baden-Württemberg, Regierungsentwurf zur Umsetzung der GEAS-Reform ermöglicht Inhaftierung von Kindern, September 2025, available in German here.
[17] Ibid.
[18] German Institute for Human Rights, Statement on the Draft GEAS Adjustment Act (Stellungnahme zum Entwurf eines GEAS-Anpassungsgesetzes), available in German here.
[19] Annika Fischer-Uebler, Schlechte Aussichten für Geflüchtete, 13 March 2026, available in German here.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Nikolaj Nielsen, ‘Behind EU’s December asylum relocation pledges: More deal-making, fewer transfers’ EUobserver (30 January 2026), available here.
[22] Tagesschau, Bund will Asylberartung offenbar nicht mehr fördern, 14 March 2026, available in German here.
[23] Diakonie, Abschaffung der Asylverfahrensberatung wäre ein folgenschwerer Fehler, 16 March 2026, available in German here. Der Partitaetische Gesamtverband, Aus für unabhängige Asylverfahrensberatung: Innenministerium stellt bewährtes Beratungsangebot für Geflüchtete infrage, 16 March 2026, available in German here.