The Berlin Administrative Court is annoyed by the State Office for Immigration (LEA) due to excessively long naturalization procedures.

Imagine you've done everything. You've learned German, you've worked hard for years, you've paid your taxes, and finally submitted that long-awaited application for naturalization . But then: nothing happens. Months go by, years pass, and the authorities remain silent. Eventually, the only option left is to go to court – to file an action for failure to act . You'd think that at this point, things would finally start moving, since a judge is now looking over the shoulder of the administration. But far from it. In Berlin, we're currently witnessing a situation that's unusual even for experienced lawyers. The State Office for Immigration (LEA) sometimes doesn't even respond to the court's correspondence . But now a turning point seems to have been reached. The Berlin Administrative Court has had enough of the excuses and the bureaucratic silence. As lawyers, we're currently observing a significant hardening of the tone in the judiciary , which could offer a glimmer of hope for many applicants.

LEA overload as a permanent condition

The Berlin State Office for Immigration is no secret. Since the centralization of naturalization procedures, the agency has been grappling with a gigantic backlog of applications and a simultaneously massive increase in new ones. While there are initial reports of success in reducing this backlog, the reality in our daily practice as a law firm often looks quite different. For individuals whose lives are blocked by the lack of a passport—whether in job hunting, travel, or political participation—the statistical improvement offers little comfort. In many cases, the procedures simply still take far too long . If the statutory processing period of three months expires without sufficient justification, an action for failure to act is the most powerful weapon available to us under administrative law. But what happens when even this weapon is met with a wall of silence?

Flood of lawsuits and the paralysis of the authorities

In recent months, the LEA (State Office for Refugee Affairs) has been hit by a veritable flood of lawsuits for failure to act. The agency appears to be completely overwhelmed by the sheer number of legal proceedings. Simply failing to process applications is no longer enough; now the office is apparently unable even to send the necessary statements of defense to the court . This is a warning sign for the rule of law. Normally, legal proceedings are a structured dialogue: the plaintiff substantiates their claim, the court sets a deadline, and the agency responds. In Berlin, however, there is often radio silence. The court sends reminder after reminder, but the files remain untouched at the LEA. This disregard for judicial procedure is now causing the judges at the Berlin Administrative Court to lose patience.

VG Berlin visibly annoyed

The tense atmosphere at the Administrative Court is evident in court orders issued in several legal proceedings . In these orders, the court uses language rarely seen with such clarity. It's no longer just a polite reminder; it speaks plainly. The orders, addressed to the LEA (State Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control), state verbatim:

"We hereby urgently remind you of the need to file a statement of defense, including all documents submitted to date in the court proceedings. The lawsuit was filed almost a year ago. Despite repeated reminders, the defendant has still not responded. While we understand the workload of the State Office for Immigration, this conduct in the proceedings is no longer acceptable. Should there be no response, the court reserves the right to schedule a hearing to clarify the background of the matter and to order the defendant's personal appearance."

This passage is remarkable. While the court acknowledges the burden placed on the LEA (State Office for Migration and Refugees), it makes it unequivocally clear that the limits of what is tolerable have been exceeded. When an authority fails to respond to a complaint for almost a year, the fundamental right to effective legal protection is undermined.

Threat of severe consequences

The final part of the court order is particularly interesting. The court reserves the right to schedule a hearing to clarify the reasons for the impediment and to order the defendant's personal appearance . For a government agency, this is a diplomatic disaster. If top officials of the LEA (State Office for Migration and Refugees) have to appear in court to explain why their department is not working, it creates enormous political and administrative pressure. The court is signaling here: We will no longer be ignored. We will hold those responsible accountable if the rule of law is undermined.

Hope for acceleration

What does this mean for you as an applicant? This new strictness from the Berlin Administrative Court sends an important signal. It shows that, despite the current delays, filing an action for failure to act remains the only way to exert pressure. If the court starts scheduling hearings, the LEA (State Office for Citizenship and Immigration) will be forced to prioritize these cases . No one at the office wants to stand before an irate judge and have to explain why they haven't responded to court mail for months. We expect that this increasing pressure from the judiciary will force the LEA to streamline its processes in the legal proceedings . The goal is clear: Naturalization must not be a gamble against time, but must remain a reliable process governed by the rule of law.

Conclusion: Be persistent

In summary, the patience of the Berlin Administrative Court has run out. The overload of the LEA (State Reception Center for Immigration and Asylum Seekers) must not lead to legal proceedings becoming futile. The fact that judges are now threatening to order personal appearances is a clear sign of a dysfunctional system that is currently being forcibly brought back into line. For everyone waiting for their naturalization, this means: Don't give up. Legal pressure is effective, even if it sometimes takes longer than the rule of law actually allows. If the authorities remain silent, the court must speak – and at the moment, the Berlin Administrative Court is speaking very clearly.