Four Berlin residents, three of whom have EU passports, have reportedly been given orders to leave Germany over their alleged involvement in the violent takeover of a university building and accusations of expressing support for Hamas.
Irish citizens Shane O’Brien, 29, and Roberta Murray, 31, as well as one Polish and one American national, are facing deportation on 21 April according to their joint statement.
A representative from Berlin’s Senate Department of the Interior and Sport told the JC that the State Office for Immigration (LEA) “issued a residence termination notice against four foreign nationals” in connection with demonstrations that took place at Freie Universität Berlin on 17 October 2024.
“At that time, a violent and masked group of people entered a university building,” the spokesperson said. “As a result, there was significant property damage within the building, including graffiti related to the ‘Israel-Palestine complex’ as well as other crimes. According to local media, the criminal proceedings are ongoing.”
All four of the potential deportees are accused of being involved in the occupation of the university building and all have been accused of “indirectly” support Hamas or pro-Hamas groups, but none have yet been charged with any offence in relation to the incident.
In their joint statement, O’Brien said that he was arrested at a protest in Berlin in October, while Murray said she has been accused by police of using banned pro-Palestine slogans at local Gaza protests. They claimed that the Berlin Interior Department ordered their deportation on accusations of “antisemitism” and “supporting terrorist organisations”.
According to information obtained by The Intercept, an American left-wing news outlet, the decision to issue deportation orders was based on several separate allegations. The report states O’Brien is the only one of the four whose deportation order included a charge that has been brought before a criminal court in Berlin, where he was acquitted after being accused of calling a police officer a “fascist” (it is a crime to insult an officer in Germany).
German immigration law does not require authorities to provide criminal convictions to issue orders for deportation, but justification proportionate to the punishment must be supplied. In an unprecedented move, three of the deportation orders also reportedly refer to the policy of “Staatsräson” or “reason of state” as justification.
A foundational aspect of post-war German foreign policy, Staatsräson maintains that, as a consequence of the Third Reich’s perpetration of the Holocaust, Germany must defend Israel's security as a matter of its own national interest.
There has also been concern over the proposed deportation of the three individuals who are EU citizens and, as such, entitled to freedom of movement within the Schengen zone.
According to the Freedom of Movement Act, “There must be a real and sufficiently serious threat to the public order, affecting the basic interests of society” to revoke an EU citizen’s entitlement to national residence.
But the group claimed that the deportation orders were the result of a “weaponisation of immigration law”.
Their lawyer Alexander Gorski added: “They are basically arguing that, due to the German Staatsräson, it requires the most severe action that German migration law knows.
"I’ve never before seen such a political wording [as the grounds for deportation].
"The police claimed that our clients participated in the effort to occupy the university. However, the police have not handed over the file to the state prosecutor. We have not been granted access to the files.”
Gorski also claimed that the government was using migration law as “a tool of repression against social movements”.
A spokesperson for the city government said that it could not share more information due to data protection rules, adding: “Any criminal convictions will be taken into account in the respective assessment. However, they do not constitute a prerequisite for the imposition of appropriate measures.”
But Thomas Oberhäuser, chair of the German Bar Association’s committee on migration law, suggested that at least part of the decision could be overturned on appeal.
He told the Financial Times: “It’s very difficult to expel EU citizens. Saying something that is not in accordance with our ideas about preventing antisemitism is not enough.”
