<\/span>Naturalization Applicant Had Unresolved Identity<\/span><\/h3>\nThe minor, stateless plaintiff had a Lebanese father and a Turkish mother. The father had been granted a Lebanese passport after being naturalized in Lebanon in 1994 as part of a group naturalization. The mother was registered in the Turkish birth registry, and a Turkish national passport was issued to her in 1988, shortly before entering Germany.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Father and Mother Held Turkish and Lebanese Nationalities<\/span><\/h3>\nThe father had also been issued a Turkish national passport under a different name in 1988. The Turkish Consulate General in Hanover confirmed, after consulting with the relevant Turkish registry office, that the family were Turkish nationals. Nevertheless, the plaintiff had not made any efforts to obtain either a Turkish or a Lebanese passport.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Plaintiff Was Born in Germany and Had Never Left<\/span><\/h3>\nThe plaintiff\u2019s naturalization request was denied due to unresolved identity issues. The plaintiff then filed a lawsuit in the first instance with the Administrative Court of Oldenburg (Case No.: 11 A 8783\/17). The Administrative Court upheld the decision of the naturalization authority. Consequently, the plaintiff applied for admission of the appeal to the Higher Administrative Court of Lower Saxony.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Decision of the Higher Administrative Court of Lower Saxony:<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/span>First Instance Denied Naturalization<\/span><\/h3>\nThe Higher Administrative Court agreed with the lower court and ruled that the appeal would not be admitted, as the plaintiff was responsible for the unresolved identity issues.<\/p>\n
The plaintiff\u2019s argument that her situation differed fundamentally from that of other naturalization applicants who had lived abroad for years because she was born and had spent her entire life in Germany did not lead to a different assessment.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Plaintiff Did Not Sufficiently Attempt to Clarify Identity<\/span><\/h3>\nThe Administrative Court was correct in requiring the clarification of the applicant\u2019s identity and nationality as a mandatory prerequisite for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 of the German Nationality Act (StAG). The fact that the principle of avoiding multiple nationalities had been abandoned with the law to modernize nationality law, allowing naturalizations generally to occur while accepting multiple nationalities, does not imply that the legislator intended to waive the clarification of nationality. \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> demanded. The mere fact that the Act on the Modernisation of Citizenship Law abandons the previously applicable principle of avoiding multiple nationalities, that naturalisations may in future generally take place with the acceptance of multiple nationalities and that it is therefore no longer necessary to give up the previous nationality or nationalities, cannot lead to the conclusion that the legislator wanted to dispense with clarification of nationality.<\/p>\n<\/span>Higher Administrative Court Also Saw the Need for Identity Clarification Under the Step Model<\/span><\/h3>\nThe clarification of the applicant\u2019s nationality is a fundamental prerequisite for conducting the still necessary status and security checks, as nationality and identity are mutually influencing. The step model developed by the Federal Administrative Court (judgment of September 23, 2020 \u2013 BVerwG 1 C 36.19) still applies, which outlines the requirements for examining and clarifying identity and the corresponding obligations of the applicant. Therefore, the requirement for identity clarification for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG remains justified, even for foreigners born in Germany.Judgement from. 23.9.2020 - BVerwG 1 C 36.19<\/span><\/span>), the requirements for the examination and clarification of identity and the existing obligations of the naturalisation applicant to cooperate in this respect. The requirement to clarify identity for naturalisation according to \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> is therefore still objectively justified for foreigners born in Germany.<\/p>\nResult: The appeal is not to be admitted.<\/p>\n
![\"Immigration](\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/Stufenpruefung_Identitaet.png\")
<\/p>\n
As a result, the appeal should not be allowed.<\/p>\n
The father had also been issued a Turkish national passport under a different name in 1988. The Turkish Consulate General in Hanover confirmed, after consulting with the relevant Turkish registry office, that the family were Turkish nationals. Nevertheless, the plaintiff had not made any efforts to obtain either a Turkish or a Lebanese passport.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Plaintiff Was Born in Germany and Had Never Left<\/span><\/h3>\nThe plaintiff\u2019s naturalization request was denied due to unresolved identity issues. The plaintiff then filed a lawsuit in the first instance with the Administrative Court of Oldenburg (Case No.: 11 A 8783\/17). The Administrative Court upheld the decision of the naturalization authority. Consequently, the plaintiff applied for admission of the appeal to the Higher Administrative Court of Lower Saxony.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Decision of the Higher Administrative Court of Lower Saxony:<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/span>First Instance Denied Naturalization<\/span><\/h3>\nThe Higher Administrative Court agreed with the lower court and ruled that the appeal would not be admitted, as the plaintiff was responsible for the unresolved identity issues.<\/p>\n
The plaintiff\u2019s argument that her situation differed fundamentally from that of other naturalization applicants who had lived abroad for years because she was born and had spent her entire life in Germany did not lead to a different assessment.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Plaintiff Did Not Sufficiently Attempt to Clarify Identity<\/span><\/h3>\nThe Administrative Court was correct in requiring the clarification of the applicant\u2019s identity and nationality as a mandatory prerequisite for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 of the German Nationality Act (StAG). The fact that the principle of avoiding multiple nationalities had been abandoned with the law to modernize nationality law, allowing naturalizations generally to occur while accepting multiple nationalities, does not imply that the legislator intended to waive the clarification of nationality. \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> demanded. The mere fact that the Act on the Modernisation of Citizenship Law abandons the previously applicable principle of avoiding multiple nationalities, that naturalisations may in future generally take place with the acceptance of multiple nationalities and that it is therefore no longer necessary to give up the previous nationality or nationalities, cannot lead to the conclusion that the legislator wanted to dispense with clarification of nationality.<\/p>\n<\/span>Higher Administrative Court Also Saw the Need for Identity Clarification Under the Step Model<\/span><\/h3>\nThe clarification of the applicant\u2019s nationality is a fundamental prerequisite for conducting the still necessary status and security checks, as nationality and identity are mutually influencing. The step model developed by the Federal Administrative Court (judgment of September 23, 2020 \u2013 BVerwG 1 C 36.19) still applies, which outlines the requirements for examining and clarifying identity and the corresponding obligations of the applicant. Therefore, the requirement for identity clarification for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG remains justified, even for foreigners born in Germany.Judgement from. 23.9.2020 - BVerwG 1 C 36.19<\/span><\/span>), the requirements for the examination and clarification of identity and the existing obligations of the naturalisation applicant to cooperate in this respect. The requirement to clarify identity for naturalisation according to \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> is therefore still objectively justified for foreigners born in Germany.<\/p>\nResult: The appeal is not to be admitted.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
As a result, the appeal should not be allowed.<\/p>\n
<\/span>First Instance Denied Naturalization<\/span><\/h3>\nThe Higher Administrative Court agreed with the lower court and ruled that the appeal would not be admitted, as the plaintiff was responsible for the unresolved identity issues.<\/p>\n
The plaintiff\u2019s argument that her situation differed fundamentally from that of other naturalization applicants who had lived abroad for years because she was born and had spent her entire life in Germany did not lead to a different assessment.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Plaintiff Did Not Sufficiently Attempt to Clarify Identity<\/span><\/h3>\nThe Administrative Court was correct in requiring the clarification of the applicant\u2019s identity and nationality as a mandatory prerequisite for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 of the German Nationality Act (StAG). The fact that the principle of avoiding multiple nationalities had been abandoned with the law to modernize nationality law, allowing naturalizations generally to occur while accepting multiple nationalities, does not imply that the legislator intended to waive the clarification of nationality. \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> demanded. The mere fact that the Act on the Modernisation of Citizenship Law abandons the previously applicable principle of avoiding multiple nationalities, that naturalisations may in future generally take place with the acceptance of multiple nationalities and that it is therefore no longer necessary to give up the previous nationality or nationalities, cannot lead to the conclusion that the legislator wanted to dispense with clarification of nationality.<\/p>\n<\/span>Higher Administrative Court Also Saw the Need for Identity Clarification Under the Step Model<\/span><\/h3>\nThe clarification of the applicant\u2019s nationality is a fundamental prerequisite for conducting the still necessary status and security checks, as nationality and identity are mutually influencing. The step model developed by the Federal Administrative Court (judgment of September 23, 2020 \u2013 BVerwG 1 C 36.19) still applies, which outlines the requirements for examining and clarifying identity and the corresponding obligations of the applicant. Therefore, the requirement for identity clarification for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG remains justified, even for foreigners born in Germany.Judgement from. 23.9.2020 - BVerwG 1 C 36.19<\/span><\/span>), the requirements for the examination and clarification of identity and the existing obligations of the naturalisation applicant to cooperate in this respect. The requirement to clarify identity for naturalisation according to \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> is therefore still objectively justified for foreigners born in Germany.<\/p>\nResult: The appeal is not to be admitted.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
As a result, the appeal should not be allowed.<\/p>\n
The Administrative Court was correct in requiring the clarification of the applicant\u2019s identity and nationality as a mandatory prerequisite for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 of the German Nationality Act (StAG). The fact that the principle of avoiding multiple nationalities had been abandoned with the law to modernize nationality law, allowing naturalizations generally to occur while accepting multiple nationalities, does not imply that the legislator intended to waive the clarification of nationality. \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> demanded. The mere fact that the Act on the Modernisation of Citizenship Law abandons the previously applicable principle of avoiding multiple nationalities, that naturalisations may in future generally take place with the acceptance of multiple nationalities and that it is therefore no longer necessary to give up the previous nationality or nationalities, cannot lead to the conclusion that the legislator wanted to dispense with clarification of nationality.<\/p>\n The clarification of the applicant\u2019s nationality is a fundamental prerequisite for conducting the still necessary status and security checks, as nationality and identity are mutually influencing. The step model developed by the Federal Administrative Court (judgment of September 23, 2020 \u2013 BVerwG 1 C 36.19) still applies, which outlines the requirements for examining and clarifying identity and the corresponding obligations of the applicant. Therefore, the requirement for identity clarification for naturalization under \u00a7 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG remains justified, even for foreigners born in Germany.Judgement from. 23.9.2020 - BVerwG 1 C 36.19<\/span><\/span>), the requirements for the examination and clarification of identity and the existing obligations of the naturalisation applicant to cooperate in this respect. The requirement to clarify identity for naturalisation according to \u00a7 Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG<\/span> is therefore still objectively justified for foreigners born in Germany.<\/p>\n Result: The appeal is not to be admitted.<\/p>\n As a result, the appeal should not be allowed.<\/p>\n<\/span>Higher Administrative Court Also Saw the Need for Identity Clarification Under the Step Model<\/span><\/h3>\n
<\/p>\n