Making and registering the application
Asylum seekers can make an asylum request (Asylgesuch) at the border and are obliged to do so if they do not have the necessary entry documents, in accordance with § 13(3) of the Asylum Act (AsylG), which refers to § 18 AsylG. However, they cannot lodge a formal asylum application (Asylantrag) at the border. In 2024 and 2025, the relationship between asylum requests and formal asylum applications shows a high rate of conversion from request to application, though some delays were observed.[1] In 2024, out of 213,499 asylum requests, 198,543 (93.0%) led to formal applications, while 14,956 (7.0%) did not, with an average duration of 13.4 days between request and application. In 2025, 101,686 of 111,814 requests (90.9%) resulted in applications, 10,128 (9.1%) did not, and the average delay decreased to 11.2 days.[2] To lodge a formal asylum application, asylum seekers must be referred to an initial reception centre, where the formal asylum procedure is initiated. The border police register their personal data and inform both the BAMF and the reception centre.[3] Irrespective of special regulations which apply in the border region only (see Access to the territory and push backs for details), most applications are made by asylum seekers who have already entered the territory. Under these circumstances the law obliges asylum seekers to ‘immediately’ report to a ‘reception facility’ (Aufnahmeeinrichtung). Alternatively, they can report to a police station or to an office of the foreigners’ authorities, in which case they have to report to the nearest reception facility as soon as possible.[4] At this stage of initial registration, personal data including photographs and fingerprints are collected and stored in the ‘Central Register of Foreigners’ (Ausländerzentralregister (AZR)), to which a number of public authorities have access.[5] The authorities can initiate checks with police and secret service agencies at this stage to check for entries indicating crimes on the basis of which international protection is to be denied or in connection to terrorism.[6] Following this first contact with the authorities, the asylum application has to be made ‘immediately’. There is no strict definition of an ‘immediate’ application and there are no exclusion rules for applications which are filed later. However, it is established case law that the application should be filed after a maximum of two weeks unless in exceptional circumstances.[7] Delay in applying may be held against the asylum seeker during the asylum procedure if no reasonable justification for the delay is brought forward.
Once asylum seekers have reported to the ‘reception facility’ mentioned above, they must be issued an ‘arrival certificate’ (Ankunftsnachweis). Afterwards, the responsible branch office of the BAMF is determined with the help of distribution system known as Initial Distribution of Asylum Seekers (Erstverteilung der Asylbegehrenden, EASY). This distribution system allocates places according to a quota system known as ‘Königsteiner Schlüssel’ based on the reception capacities of the Federal States. These capacities are determined by considering the size and the economic strength of the Federal States. Furthermore, the EASY-system takes into account which branch office of the BAMF deals with the asylum applicant’s country of origin (see section on Freedom of Movement).[8] It is possible that the EASY-system assigns a place in the facility to which asylum-seekers have reported. In this case, they are referred to the BAMF office, often located on the same premises or nearby, for the registration of the asylum application. If the EASY-system assigns a facility located in another region, asylum-seekers are transported to this facility or are provided with tickets to travel there on their own.
While the BAMF is responsible for the processing of the asylum application, responsibility for the reception and accommodation of asylum applicants lies with the Federal States. Therefore, the regional branch offices of the BAMF are usually assigned to an initial reception centre managed by the Federal State. Both branch office and initial reception centre may in turn be parts of an ‘arrival centre’ (Ankunftszentrum) or of an ‘AnkER-centre’ (AnkER-Zentrum). The organisational structure and the denomination of these institutions depend on the way the Federal States have organised the reception system and how they cooperate with the BAMF at the respective location (see Housing).
Only the BAMF is entitled to register an asylum application. Hence, asylum seekers reporting to the police or to another authority will be referred to the BAMF and they do not have the legal status of asylum applicants as long as they have not arrived at the responsible branch office of the BAMF and until their applications have been lodged. However, persons with an arrival certificate (Ankunftsnachweis) are also entitled to minimum benefits according to the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act. Asylum applicants are obliged to appear in person without delay or on the date determined by the authorities at the responsible branch office of the BAMF. Asylum applicants who fail to comply with this obligation face the sanction of ‘failure to pursue’ the asylum procedure: in such cases, a decision to discontinue the examination of the application is issued. The asylum procedure can be abandoned before it has begun, due to a lack of registration.[9] An applicant whose asylum procedure has been discontinued may apply for the proceedings to be reopened in certain circumstances.[10]
In 2025, a total of 168,543 people applied for asylum in Germany, comprising 113,236 first-time applications and 55,307 subsequent applications, marking a substantial decline in overall asylum applications.[11] Compared to the previous year’s reference period, which recorded 229,751 first-time applications, this represents a reduction of 50.7.[12] Notably, 17,707 of the first-time applications in 2025 concerned children under the age of one who were born in Germany, highlighting the significant share of asylum claims linked to births.[13] Besides that, out of the 168,543 asylum applications lodged in 2025, a total of 50,866 were first-time applications submitted on behalf of minors under the age of 18.[14] Among these children and adolescents, 4,926 were registered as unaccompanied minors.[15]
Over the same period, the BAMF decided on 310,930 asylum procedures substantially exceeding the number of new applications.[16]
In comparison, in 2024, the BAMF received 229,751 first-time asylum applications and 21,194 subsequent applications. Compared to the previous year, first-time applications decreased by 30.2%, while subsequent applications dropped by 7.0%. In 2023, a total of 351,915 asylum applications were submitted in Germany.[17]
If a person expresses the intention to seek asylum in a detention centre, the application is filed in written form to the BAMF, who then designates the responsible branch office (for more details see Legal framework of detention).[18]
Lodging the application
Once they arrive in the responsible branch office of the BAMF, which may be a part of an arrival centre or an AnkER centre, asylum applicants lodge their application with the BAMF. Following the lodging of the application, they are issued a ‘permission to stay for asylum applicants’ (Aufenhaltsgestattung). With this document, the arrival certificate ceases to be valid and must be retracted by the authorities.
While the application generally must be lodged in person, the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic has brought about significant changes in the application procedure. Lodging of applications in person was temporarily suspended at the beginning of the pandemic in favour of written submissions, and then resumed, first with specific hygienic measures and then as before. Nonetheless, applications via written form were still possible as of early 2022 if this is necessary to comply with infection protection regulations.[19] As of early 2023, this is still possible based on an agreement between the BAMF branch office and the respective initial reception centre, according to information provided by the BAMF.[20]
Use of digital tools in the asylum procedure
Since 2015, the BAMF has gradually increased the number and use of digital tools for establishing the identity and country of origin of applicants at the registration or lodging stage under what it calls ‘integrated identity management’.[21] Four tools are being used:
- Reading out of mobile devices such as smartphones
- Language/dialect detection software
- Image biometrics
- Transcription of names[22]
According to the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, they use biometric data such as fingerprints and facial images to uniquely identify asylum seekers and migrants in order to prevent multiple registrations, establish identity, and enhance security.[23] Upon asylum application, all applicants have their photograph and fingerprints taken, allowing automated cross‑checks that help rule out multiple identities and support decision‑making in asylum procedures; this biometric information can also be accessed nationwide by other authorities involved in the process via a core data system to strengthen security assessments.[24] In addition to fingerprints, BAMF employs image biometrics with specialised software to ensure that persons are not already registered under different names or file numbers, and conducts in‑depth document authenticity and other identity checks where needed.[25] These measures are part of a broader identity management framework that includes both biometric collection and cross‑referencing with systems like EURODAC to support coordinated asylum and migration management.[26]
In early 2025, the German Federal Ministry of the Interior proposed changes to the Asylum Act to expand the use of facial recognition and biometric searches in asylum procedures.[27] The draft legislation would have allowed the BAMF to compare asylum seekers’ photos with publicly available personal data from the internet if they could not provide identity documents, and would have removed existing safeguards requiring the use of “less intrusive” means, prior notification of the purpose and scope of biometric checks, and reporting to data protection authorities.[28] The proposal also envisaged granting BAMF, the Federal Police, and the Federal Criminal Police (BKA) new powers to share biometric information internationally for national security purposes. However, the law did not enter into force, as the draft was not enacted before the end of the legislative term.[29]
If any of these before mentioned tools give indications that the identity or country of origin of an applicant might be different from what they report, this is to be clarified during the personal interview. Reading out of mobile devices, language detection and name transcription are not used in cases where an entry is found in the VIS-database on Schengen visa, since this is regarded as sufficient proof of identity.[30] According to the BAMF, specifically, if a VIS-hit is shown as part of the central register of foreigners (AZR) comparison and a visa has been issued, or if according to the AZR, the passport/passport replacement document or other suitable proof of identity has been retained by another authority and its authenticity has been entered in the AZR, this procedure is not carried out.[31]
The reading out of mobile devices is possible in cases where applicants do not provide identity documents or where there are indications that the documents provided are falsified.[32] It can only be performed by persons qualified to be judges (i.e. with two completed law exams), who decide whether to share the obtained data with the responsible case officer. The obtained information can only be used to establish identity or country of origin, and not for other purposes during the asylum procedure.[33] The types of data that are used as indications for country of origin or identity are geolocation data, the countries to which the majority of phone calls are made, the language of communication, the countries in which the saved contacts are located, or the domain host country of frequently used websites.[34]
If an applicant refuses to hand out their smartphone, the BAMF considers the application to be withdrawn and ends the asylum procedure. For subsequent applications, failure to hand out one’s smartphone can be used as a ground to withdraw material benefits, as these can be reduced for applicants who fail to cooperate with authorities (see Reduction or withdrawal of reception conditions). However, reading out of smartphones is only done in these cases when the BAMF intends to conduct an interview with the applicant.[35]
On 16 February 2023, the Federal Administrative Court ruled against the practice of screening applicants’ smartphones, after the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (GFF, an NGO focused on strategic litigation for fundamental and civic rights) had filed several lawsuits.[36] The Federal Administrative Court ruled that the practice of reading out data from mobile devices to establish asylum applicants’ identities was not lawful under the then applicable version of § 15a of the Asylum Act, particularly when less intrusive means, such as official documents (e.g., marriage certificates), register comparisons, or inquiries with translators, were available. However, with the Return Act of 21 February 2024, the legal framework was amended, specifically § 48 and § 8(1c) of the Residence Act, now explicitly allowing the reading of data carriers, but only if no milder means are available. The law has been heavily criticised by NGOs[37] as infringing upon people’s fundamental rights of privacy and informational autonomy.
At the same time, as a report of the Organization Netzpolitik.org revealed, German Federal States are investing significant funds in software to extract and analyse data from the mobile phones of individuals obligated to leave the country. For instance, Bavaria’s State Office for Asylum and Repatriation spends approximately € 200,000 annually on licenses from Cellebrite, an Israeli digital forensics company. Other states, including Baden-Württemberg, Rhineland-Palatinate, North Rhine-Westphalia, and Lower Saxony, have also acquired similar tools. These tools are used to uncover digital evidence of identity or nationality, especially when individuals lack valid identification documents. However, experts question the effectiveness of these measures and raise concerns about potential violations of fundamental rights, labelling such practices as “pure harassment.”[38] Additionally, similar issues have emerged in the context of return procedures, where authorities are increasingly resorting to intrusive digital searches to establish identity.[39] For more information on this, see National protection statuses and return procedure.
Language or dialect detection software can also only be used when no identity documents are provided, and only for applicants older than 14 years.[40] Applicants have to speak into a telephone, and a speech analysis software then produces a report on the languages or dialects detected and the probability that these were indeed the spoken languages or dialects. As for smartphone screening, the results can never be used as proof or identity or country of origin, but merely as indications which will be raised during the personal interview in cases where the reports contradict the information given by the applicant. According to BAMF internal guidelines, as of January 2023 speech recognition is used for the main Arabic dialects (Maghrebi Arabic, Egyptian, Iraqi, Levantine and Gulf) and for Dari, Pashto and Persian.[41] As of August 2022, the detection rate for these languages and dialects was around 80% for Arabic dialects, ca. 73% for Dari and ca. 77% for Pashto.[42] Such a speech and dialect recognition software has been used for 29,632 cases in 2022 and for 22,947 cases from January until end of June 2023. The recognition rate for Arabic dialects rose to 87 % in 2023.[43] According to the Federal Government, in the first half of 2024, the dialect and language recognition software was used in 2,431 cases.[44] During this period, the accuracy of the reports improved, with 91% supporting the applicants’ claims about their origin and 9% not supporting them. It is noted that the data is manually recorded and therefore has limited reliability, with absolute numbers not being disclosed for the 2024 breakdown. The results are included in the procedural files of applicants and serve as one of many indicators to guide decision-makers in formulating specific questions regarding the applicants’ origins during hearings.
The use of language detection software has been subject to criticism by NGOs and the opposition parties, who highlight that detection tools can be inaccurate especially for Arabic dialects in countries with a high number of local languages. In 2022, the software was found to perform poorly especially for Arabic dialects in countries with a high number of local languages, such as Yemen or Sudan, and it was highlighted that the amount of training data for the artificial intelligence varied significantly between languages, leading to likely more accurate predictions for some languages than others.[45] According to the BAMF, only applicants who speak one of the major Arabic dialects (Maghreb, Egyptian, Iraqi, Levantine and Gulf) are eligible for the use of language analysis for Arabic dialects.[46] The authority further stresses, regarding fears as to the overreliance on the detection tools by caseworkers,[47] that according to the official internal guidelines of the BAMF, which asylum officers are required to follow, the results of the Dialect and Language recognition System (DIAS) evaluation merely have indicative value regarding an applicant’s claimed country of origin, and must not be used as the sole criteria for granting or denying protection status. The outcome of a DIAS analysis is to be evaluated together with all other available information when determining an applicant’s country of origin. According to the BAMF, if the DIAS result suggests a language different from the one stated by the applicant, it can help guide the asylum officer during the personal interview in formulating specific follow-up questions aimed at clarifying the applicant’s country of origin.[48]
In addition, the BAMF has been piloting the use of blockchain technology to improve communication in the asylum procedure in the AnkER facility in Dresden since April 2021.[56]
[1] Information provided by the BAMF on 13 February 2026.
[2] Ibid.
[3] A collection of documents used by the authorities and information handed out to asylum seekers at this stage is available on the BAMF website in several languages: https://bit.ly/3XGnpYs.
[4] Section 13 Asylum Act, Section 20 asylum Act.
[5] BAMF, Arrival and registration, available at: https://bit.ly/3ItgFpW.
[6] Section 73 Residence Act
[7] Federal Administrative Court (BVerwG), Decision 9 C35.96, 13 May 1197, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3NyYB25.
[8] BAMF, Asylum and refugee protection, available at: http://bit.ly/40i7UaK.
[9] Sections 20, 22 and 23 Asylum Act.
[10] Section 33, para. 5 Asylum Act.
[11] BAMF, Asylzahlen Gesamtjahr und Dezember 2025, 12 January 2026, available in German here.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Information provided by the BAMF on 13 February 2026.
[15] Ibid.
[16] BAMF, Asylzahlen Gesamtjahr und Dezember 2025, 12 January 2026, available in German here.
[17] Federal Office for Asylum and Migration, Asylzahlen Gesamtjahr und Dezember 2024, 09 January 2025, available in German here.
[18] Section 14(2) Asylum Act.
[19] Information provided by the BAMF, 10 March 2022.
[20] Information provided by the BAMF, 9 March 2023.
[21] For an extensive overview of data collection and management In the German asylum procedure see Janne Grote, Accurate, timely, interoperable? Data management in the asylum procedure in Germany, Study by the German National Contact Point for the European Migration Network (EMN), Working Paper 90 of the Research Centre of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, February 2021, available at: https://bit.ly/3Y993A0.
[22] BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 307.
[23] BAMF, ‘Identity management’ available here.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Bundestag, ‘Gesetz zur Stärkung der polizeilichen Befugnisse’ (2025), available here.
[28] Netzpolitik.org, Gesichtersuche im Asylverfahren: Biometrie ohne Bremse?, 26 March 2025, available here.
[29] Bundestag, ‘Gesetz zur Stärkung der polizeilichen Befugnisse’, 2025, available here.
[30] BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 307.
[31] Information provided by the BAMF on 28 May 2025.
[32] Section 15a Asylum Act, BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 307.
[33] BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 308.
[34] BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 314.
[35] BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 310.
[36] Federal Administrative Court, Case 1 C 19.21, 16 February 2023. A summary of the decision can be found at http://bit.ly/40r5Jlh. See also GFF, BAMF-Handydatenauswertungen, available in German at: http://bit.ly/3kVPBZo.
[37] Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte, Bundesregierung plant Ausweitung von Handyauslesungen bei Geflüchteten trotz Urteil des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts, 17 November 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3SNm6Gp; Netzpolitik.org, Anwalts-Netzwerk hält Abschiebegesetz für verfassungswidrig, 30 November 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/42LUxlq.
[38] Netzpolitik.org, ‚Hunderttausende Euro, um Handys von Geflüchteten zu knacken‘, 24 May 2024, available in German here.
[39] Chris Köver, ‘Ausländerbehörden: Handy-Razzia zur Identitätsfeststellung wird bundesweiter Standard’ Netzpolitik.org (29 September 2025), available in German here.
[40] BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 317. For an overview in English see EMN/OECD, The Use of Digitalisation and Artificial Intelligence in Migration Management, February 2022, available at https://bit.ly/3HqCdnv, 9.
[41] BAMF, Dienstanweisung Asyl (internal directive for asylum procedures), version of January 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/3J5jPTA, 317.
[42] Federal Government, response to parliamentary question by The Left, 20/3238, 31 August 2022, available in German at: https://bit.ly/41vbFLv, 10.
[43] Federal Government, reply to parliamentary request by The Left, 20/9419, 17 November 2023, available in German at: https://bit.ly/48q5wSX.
[44] German Bundestag, Printed matter 20/12372, Written questions with the answers received in the week of July 22, 2024 received from the Federal Government, 26 July 2024, available in German here.
[45] See netzpolitik.org, BAMF weitet automatische Sprachanalyse aus, 5 September 2022, available in German at: http://bit.ly/3HjD8Gq.
[46] Information provided by the BAMF on 28 May 2025.
[47] See netzpolitik.org, BAMF weitet automatische Sprachanalyse aus, 5 September 2022, available in German at: http://bit.ly/3HjD8Gq.
[48] Information provided by the BAMF on 28 May 2025.
[49] Information provided by the BAMF on 13 February 2026.
[50] BAMF, Antwort auf Antrag nach dem Informationsfreiheitsgesetz zu Nutzung und Evaluierung des Sprach‑ und Dialekterkennungsassistenzsystems (DIAS) durch das BAMF (28 February 2025), available in German here.
[51] Ibid.
[52] Ibid.
[53] Ibid.
[54] Ibid.
[55] Ibid.
[56] EMN/OECD, The Use of Digitalisation and Artificial Intelligence in Migration Management, February 2022, available at: https://bit.ly/3HqCdnv, 8.