The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Białystok, Poland, ruled in favor of two migrants from Afghanistan and Ethiopia, setting a controversial precedent in the ongoing migration crisis along the Belarusian-Polish border. These individuals, who had sustained injuries while attempting to cross the border, were improperly returned to Belarus, only to challenge the Polish Border Guard’s decision in court—and win.
Human Rights and Legal Controversies
The court’s decision, made on March 5, awarded both migrants the return of their legal costs, amounting to 697 PLN each. The Afghan migrant had suffered a broken foot after falling from the border fence and was subsequently sent back to Belarus after a brief medical treatment in Poland. Similarly, the Ethiopian, who also broke his leg during the crossing attempt, claims that he faces imprisonment in his home country due to his sexual orientation.
This court ruling raises significant questions about Poland’s obligations under international human rights laws, especially regarding the treatment of asylum seekers. The Polish court found that the Border Guard had failed to adequately assess the legal status and asylum claims of the migrants before forcibly returning them to Belarus, a move deemed a violation of their rights.
Hybrid Warfare and Political Implications
The situation at the border is further complicated by accusations that the Belarusian regime, supported by Russia, is engaging in a form of “hybrid warfare,” intentionally pushing migrants toward the Polish border as a political strategy. The recent court decisions could potentially embolden more migrants to undertake the perilous journey, knowing that the Polish legal system might offer a recourse against such pushbacks.
Critics argue that such rulings not only set a dangerous precedent that could encourage illegal border crossings but also threaten to paralyze the operations of the Border Guard amid already high tensions and an influx of migrants.
Broader Legal and Social Implications
The decisions have now become legally binding, opening the door for further civil claims by migrants affected by similar circumstances. Notably, in an earlier related case from 2023, three Afghan migrants demanded 240,000 PLN in damages, though the proceedings have been prolonged, with two of the claimants having left Poland.
The Białystok court’s rulings have spotlighted potential oversights and controversies in the treatment of migrants at the border. The court criticized the Border Guard for its “parcel locker” return policy—a metaphorical gateway that quickly sends migrants back without proper legal proceedings.