Berlin’s Higher Administrative Court has dismissed the city migration office’s appeal against an earlier ruling that struck down a Schengen-wide travel and political-activity ban on Professor Ghassan Abu Sittah, a British-Palestinian plastic surgeon and rector of the University of Glasgow.
Abu Sittah had been barred from Germany after attempting to speak at a Palestine solidarity congress in April 2024. Authorities claimed his criticism of Israeli military actions threatened the “free democratic basic order” and therefore justified restrictions under § 54 Aufenthaltsgesetz. In July 2025 the Administrative Court found the ban disproportionate; last week’s appeal rejection makes that finding final.
![Court Overturns Berlin Travel-and-Speech Ban on Gaza Surgeon]()
The decision restores the professor’s right to enter Germany and the wider Schengen Area, setting a precedent on how far political expression can be cited as a national-security ground for mobility restrictions. Legal experts note that the court weighed freedom of movement and speech more heavily than the government’s doctrine of “Staatsräson” towards Israel.
For multinational organisations hosting conferences in Germany, the ruling clarifies that foreign speakers cannot be excluded merely for controversial opinions unless concrete security threats exist. Mobility and events teams should, however, continue to check whether invitees appear in the national visa warning system (INPOL) and allow extra lead-time for politically sensitive guests.
The Interior Ministry said it will review guidance to local migration offices to ensure future bans meet the new proportionality threshold. Companies that rely on short-term Schengen visas for high-profile academics and NGO partners should monitor the forthcoming circular.
Abu Sittah had been barred from Germany after attempting to speak at a Palestine solidarity congress in April 2024. Authorities claimed his criticism of Israeli military actions threatened the “free democratic basic order” and therefore justified restrictions under § 54 Aufenthaltsgesetz. In July 2025 the Administrative Court found the ban disproportionate; last week’s appeal rejection makes that finding final.
The decision restores the professor’s right to enter Germany and the wider Schengen Area, setting a precedent on how far political expression can be cited as a national-security ground for mobility restrictions. Legal experts note that the court weighed freedom of movement and speech more heavily than the government’s doctrine of “Staatsräson” towards Israel.
For multinational organisations hosting conferences in Germany, the ruling clarifies that foreign speakers cannot be excluded merely for controversial opinions unless concrete security threats exist. Mobility and events teams should, however, continue to check whether invitees appear in the national visa warning system (INPOL) and allow extra lead-time for politically sensitive guests.
The Interior Ministry said it will review guidance to local migration offices to ensure future bans meet the new proportionality threshold. Companies that rely on short-term Schengen visas for high-profile academics and NGO partners should monitor the forthcoming circular.
