Verdict of the week: No unnecessary questions at the naturalization appointment

Anyone applying for German citizenship must meet numerous requirements – from sufficient German language skills and proof of sufficient means of subsistence to passing a naturalization test . Since the reform of citizenship law in 2025, a mandatory appointment with the naturalization authority is also part of the process, during which questions about the free and democratic basic order may be asked. However, the Braunschweig Administrative Court has now ruled that authorities cannot proceed arbitrarily in this regard.

The specific case involved a Lebanese citizen who had lived in Germany for twelve years and applied for naturalization in 2023. His documents were complete, all legal requirements were met, and the security clearance was also without issue. Nevertheless, the authorities demanded an oral interview at his appointment. In addition to standard questions such as "What do you understand by democracy?" or "What is the name of the German constitution?", they also asked unusual questions about current events, international conflicts, and media consumption. When the man was unable to answer some of these questions, the authorities rejected his application. They argued that the applicant had not demonstrated a sufficient understanding of the free and democratic basic order and therefore could not effectively pledge allegiance to it.

The Braunschweig Administrative Court rightly assessed the case differently. It ruled that the rejection was unlawful because there was no legal basis or concrete reason for the extensive questioning. The man fulfilled all the requirements of the Nationality Act and provided no evidence of a lack of loyalty to the constitution. Passing the naturalization test is generally sufficient to demonstrate the necessary knowledge of the legal and social order. Additional questions may only be asked if there are objective doubts about loyalty to the constitution – for example, in the case of concrete indications of anti-constitutional activities.

Furthermore, the court clarified that the authority had committed a procedural error in this specific case: The applicant had not been presented with the legally required written declaration of loyalty. Instead, the authority had assessed the commitment to the free and democratic basic order solely based on oral answers. This procedure, the court ruled, was not covered by law .

The ruling significantly strengthens the rights of naturalization applicants. It clarifies that naturalization procedures are not ideological tests and that authorities may not arbitrarily expand their duty to question applicants. Those who meet the legal requirements may not be disadvantaged because of incomplete answers to supplementary questions. With this ruling, the Braunschweig Administrative Court not only creates legal certainty for applicants but also provides an important corrective to the excessive vetting practices of some authorities.

The ruling also sends a signal for practical application: The naturalization test retains its central importance as proof of basic knowledge about the state and its values. Only if there are genuine doubts about an applicant's inner convictions may authorities inquire further. Naturalization thus remains what it should be – a legally regulated and fair process that does not impede access to German citizenship through arbitrary hurdles.

Migrando was the first to report on the verdict.