Junk properties | Duisburg: "Evictions serve to suppress people"

What do you think of the recent ideas from North Rhine-Westphalia to sell so-called "junk properties" to municipalities more quickly and, as the State Chancellery puts it, "to protect people"?

This proposal is not new. As early as 2019, a paper established the acquisition of "problem properties" by municipalities as a strategic goal. A city development fund was set up to finance this. Overall, the idea makes sense. There are examples from cities like Dortmund where properties have changed hands , been renovated, and now provide an affordable and safe living environment that meets the needs of the local population. However, I fear that in Duisburg, where migrants are openly treated with hostility, such purchases could be used to remove these properties from the market or otherwise render them unusable for the local population. Currently, the city is actively delaying the purchase of such properties. This effectively reduces the supply of affordable housing in migrant-dominated neighborhoods. In the current debate about "organized welfare abuse," "problem properties" are identified as an "incentive" for migrants from Southeast Europe. This really worries me. And: This kind of thing leads to the criminalization of welfare recipients. We are seeing a clear shift to the right in the debate here.

What exactly are these “junk properties”?

According to the North Rhine-Westphalia Ministry for Home Affairs, Local Government, Building and Equal Opportunities, a "problem property" is "a property that is inappropriately used and/or exhibits structural deficiencies (neglect), which can have negative spillover effects on its surroundings and which poses a threat to public safety and order or does not comply with applicable regulations regarding its use, use, and management." Or even contradicts urban development goals. Since its inception, the discourse on "problem properties" has been directly linked to that of "migration from Southeast Europe." The Ministry for Home Affairs wrote: "Population groups with low incomes or at risk of discrimination in their search for housing disproportionately live here." And: "Intra-European immigration from Southeast Europe also targets these neighborhoods."

Who are the people who have to live in such buildings?

These are typically newcomers who have no access to the regular rental market due to discriminatory practices or unattainable bureaucratic criteria. They are people with Schufa entries, i.e., those with significant debts, who are rejected by private landlords and municipal housing associations. It is thus a combination of ethnic discrimination and socioeconomic precariousness that pushes people into these informally managed housing situations. These "problem properties" are often the only way to secure housing and escape homelessness.

Why is the city of Duisburg taking such brutal action against the buildings and, above all, against the tenants with its “task force”?

Local authorities have a variety of political tools at their disposal to address deficiencies in such properties. The city of Duisburg has pursued a unique approach in this regard, establishing the "Task Force for Problem Properties" in 2014 and since then evicting more than 5,000 people from their homes in over 200 properties. I believe that such an approach and the brutal means used to carry out the evictions—without prior notice to residents and without offering alternative housing options—represent a cleansing of the city of undesirable ethnic and national groups. Sören Link, the SPD mayor of Duisburg, has openly declared his intention in recent years to expel people from Bulgaria and Romania and replace them with representatives of other ethnic and national groups. In this sense, I see forced evictions less as an instrument of housing policy and more as a means of oppression and population control.

Isn't European freedom of movement also a reason why many people, especially from Bulgaria and Romania, can be "swindled" by criminal landlords? North Rhine-Westphalia is calling for restricting access to the German social security system for this group of people.

It is not European freedom of movement per se that facilitates the exploitation of migrants by criminal landlords. The problem is complex and linked to the financing of the housing market in Germany, especially since 2019. The decline in social housing and local social policy approaches that discriminate against migrant tenants rather than punishing unscrupulous landlords also play a role. In this sense, the proposal to restrict access to social benefits is counterproductive. By restricting social support for the most disadvantaged groups, authorities are increasing the risk of homelessness and extreme material hardship for migrant groups.