Germany to Cut Funding for Asylum Legal Counseling by 80% Starting 2027

Germany’s Federal Ministry of the Interior has proposed cutting funding for independent legal counseling for asylum seekers from €24.5 million to €5 million — a nearly 80% reduction — starting in 2027.

In short

• The interior ministry proposes cutting funding for independent counseling for asylum seekers from €24.5 million to €5 million in the 2027 budget.
• Free independent counseling would be preserved only for vulnerable categories: minors, pregnant women, people with disabilities, survivors of violence, and others.
• Section 12a of the Asylum Act requires counseling funding independent of BAMF — the provision isn’t formally repealed, only the amount is cut.
• The SPD, the Left, and the Greens are criticizing the proposal: without counseling, the risk of erroneous decisions and the burden on courts both rise.
• Ukrainians with temporary protection aren’t affected by the cut — they don’t go through the asylum procedure.

What Interior Minister Dobrindt Proposed

Germany’s Federal Ministry of the Interior is proposing to cut funding for legal counseling services for asylum seekers. The 2026 budget allocates €24.5 million for this purpose — money that goes exclusively toward counseling for asylum applicants. In the draft 2027 budget, Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt proposes leaving just €5 million for the same purpose.

Formally, this isn’t about eliminating counseling altogether: the minister isn’t saying asylum seekers will stop receiving counseling — he’s pushing to cut the funding by nearly fivefold. Dobrindt justifies the proposal by arguing that asylum seekers can already get free counseling from the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees even without independent counseling services.

Why BAMF Counseling Doesn’t Replace Independent Counseling

The minister justifies the cut by pointing out that asylum seekers can already get free counseling from the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) — so why keep paying independent lawyers on top of that.

But independent counseling works differently. German law grants asylum seekers a separate right to free counseling on the asylum procedure — provided by lawyers who are not affiliated with BAMF. It’s free for the asylum seeker, but these specialists are paid out of the federal budget — the very funding now proposed for cuts.

The key difference is independence: BAMF is the agency that itself decides on asylum applications, while an independent lawyer advises the applicant separately from that structure and has no stake in its decision.

Who Keeps the Right to Free Counseling

The minister proposes keeping free counseling only for a category of vulnerable applicants — and the remaining €5 million from the budget would go toward exactly that. This category includes:

• minors;
• pregnant women;
• single parents;
• elderly people and retirees;
• the seriously ill and people with disabilities;
• people with mental health conditions;
• LGBT individuals;
• survivors of violence.

The exact list of vulnerable categories in the final budget may still be revised — the list above reflects what’s currently being discussed in connection with the minister’s proposal.

Under the minister’s proposal, all other asylum seekers would not fall into this category and would instead be directed to BAMF for counseling.

What Section 12a of the Asylum Act Says

Section 12a of the Asylum Act explicitly states that counseling independent of government authorities — free, individual, and voluntary — is funded from the federal budget. This isn’t an initiative by advocacy groups; it’s a provision of existing law, and it’s exactly what critics of the minister’s proposal are citing.

The law requires that the counseling be open-ended in outcome — meaning it shouldn’t steer the applicant toward a predetermined conclusion about how the case will turn out. It can take place even before the main interview with BAMF, not only afterward.

Formally, the minister isn’t repealing this provision or amending the law — he’s only cutting funding from €24.5 million to €5 million. Whether such a cut is compatible with the requirements of Section 12a remains a matter of dispute.

Whether such a cut is compatible with the requirements of Section 12a remains a matter of dispute.

Criticism from Politicians and Legal Experts

Sebastian Fiedler, a representative of the SPD, said the restriction contradicts the coalition agreement and cannot be adopted in the form the minister proposed. The Left party has accused Minister Dobrindt of trying to circumvent the legislative purpose of independent counseling.

The Greens pointed to the practical consequences for the procedure itself: without preliminary counseling, an applicant presents their case less effectively when filing a claim, the application takes longer to process, and erroneous decisions are issued more often. Appealing such a decision then falls on the courts — adding to the burden on the judicial system.

without preliminary counseling, an applicant presents their case less effectively when filing a claim, the application takes longer to process, and erroneous decisions are issued more often

Human rights advocates link the cut to a broader tightening of migration policy: in their assessment, without independent counseling, applicants present their stories less effectively, increasing their risk of rejection.

How the Cut Fits Into the Broader Tightening of Migration Policy

According to human rights advocates, Germany’s Federal Ministry of the Interior is deliberately speeding up border procedures and the deportation of foreigners and asylum seekers already barred from staying in Germany. Cutting counseling funding fits the same logic — without independent counseling, an applicant presents their case less effectively when filing an asylum claim, raising the risk of rejection.

This isn’t the first step of its kind, nor will it be the last: upon taking office, Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated that migration policy would be tightened progressively. Cutting counseling funding is just one of several such steps in that broader sequence.

Does the Cut Affect Ukrainians With Temporary Protection

The funding cut doesn’t affect Ukrainian citizens: they aren’t going through the asylum procedure — they hold temporary protection, a different legal status with its own application process. The counseling restrictions described above apply specifically to asylum applicants, so Ukrainians with temporary protection have no reason to be concerned about this.

Frequently asked questions

What happens if an asylum seeker doesn’t fall into a vulnerable category and can’t get independent counseling

Under the minister’s proposal, that applicant would have to seek counseling from BAMF — the very agency that decides on their application. Independent counseling funded by the federal budget would no longer be available in this case, though nothing formally prevents paying for it privately.

Can an asylum seeker appeal a decision if their case was prepared without independent counseling

There’s no direct answer to this, but the logic from critics’ position follows: erroneous decisions on applications filed without preliminary counseling get appealed in court, and that’s where the burden lands. This means an appeal is formally possible, but the process would take more time and resources than if the claim had been properly prepared from the start.

Has the funding cut already taken effect

No, this is a draft 2027 budget — a proposal from the interior minister that’s still under discussion and has already drawn criticism from the SPD, the Left, and the Greens. The final budget decision and the final list of vulnerable categories may differ from what’s currently proposed.