Court ruling on action for failure to act in naturalisation proceedings: Decision of the Hessian Administrative Court

The decision of the Hessian Administrative Court (VGH) of 20 August 2024 with the file number 3 B 1062/24 attracts attention in administrative practice and among naturalisation applicants. At the centre is the Question of reasonable processing time of a naturalisation procedure and the Rights of applicants in the event of delays.

Naturalisation procedures are complex and lengthy processes that require numerous official steps. From checking identity to obtaining information from security authorities, a large number of factors have to be taken into account. The question therefore often arises as to what extent delays are justified and what options are available to applicants if decisions are not made within a reasonable period of time.

Background of the Case

The case concerns an action for failure to act brought by a naturalisation applicant against the City of Giessen. The application for naturalisation was submitted on 18 October 2023 in writing, but no decision was made. After the expiry of the three-month period according to § Section 75 sentence 2 VWGO the applicant lodged a complaint on 22 February 2024 Action for failure to act before the Gießen Administrative Court.

The Administrative Court decided to suspend the proceedings as the authority had not yet completed all the necessary checks. The applicant lodged an appeal against this suspension with the Hessian Administrative Court. The case raises fundamental questions as to the extent to which administrative inertia can be considered legitimate and what rights applicants have to take action against delays.

2. the legal basis

The Hessian Administrative Court based its decision on § SECTION 75 VWGOwhich regulates the requirements for an action for failure to act.

• § Section 75 sentence 1 VWGO: An action for failure to act is admissible if no administrative act has been issued within three months.
• § Section 75 sentence 3 VWGO: The court may stay the proceedings if there is sufficient cause for the delay.

These regulations are of great importance as they are intended to ensure that applicants do not have to wait indefinitely for an official decision. At the same time, however, courts must consider whether administrative processes can be carried out within a reasonable period of time.

3. the reasoning of the administrative court

The Gießen Administrative Court justified its decision to suspend the action for failure to act on the grounds of the complexity of the naturalisation procedure. It argued that the three-month deadline was not sufficient to fulfil the necessary legal examination requirements.

The tests include, among others:

• Identity check by security authorities (State Office of Criminal Investigation, Office for the Protection of the Constitution)
• Recording and processing of documents by the naturalisation authority
• Obtaining information from other agencies involved, such as immigration authorities and public prosecutors' offices

According to the court, these checks are essential to ensure that the naturalisation requirements are fully met and that there are no security concerns. These processes require close cooperation between various authorities, which naturally takes more time.

4. the decision of the Hessian Administrative Court

The Hessian Administrative Court dismissed the applicant's appeal and confirmed the decision of the Administrative Court. The reasoning was as follows:

1. No appeal against the decision on the merits: The complaint only serves to review the procedure and not the substantive decision.
2. Complexity of the process: The processing time is due to the complex examination.
3. Discretion of the court: The deadline set is not objectionable.

It was therefore determined that the required processing time is reasonable due to the necessary administrative processes.

5. effects on naturalisation procedures

The decision shows that applicants for a Longer processing time should be prepared.

Important consequences:

• Applicants should endeavour to obtain complete documentation at an early stage.
• Actions for failure to act cannot be submitted arbitrarily; there must be a sufficient reason.
• The naturalisation authorities have the right to set deadlines for proper examination.

The judgement makes it clear that the three-month period from § SECTION 75 VWGO is only a minimum period and can be extended in complex procedures. Applicants should be aware that a quick decision is not always possible and that a comprehensive examination is in the interest of all parties involved.