Verwaltungsgerichtshof München, Beschluss v. 22.01.2024, Az.: 5 ZB 23.2184
Case Background
The plaintiff, a Somali national born in 1994, applied for naturalization on April 26, 2018. Prior to this, the defendant, the responsible foreigner’s authority, had granted him a residence permit and later a permanent settlement permit. However, his application for naturalization was denied by decision dated February 3, 2021, due to doubts about the plaintiff’s identity. These doubts arose from the submission of a Somali birth certificate, whose probative value was questioned, as well as from conflicting identity information provided by the plaintiff during a previous stay in Italy.
Judicial review and decision
The Munich Administrative Court dismissed the plaintiff's claim on 5 October 2023. It found that the plaintiff was not entitled to naturalisation in accordance with Section 10 (1) sentence 1 StAG, as his identity and nationality had not been sufficiently clarified. The court emphasised that Somali documents were not of sufficient probative value due to the insecure situation and lack of reliable official registers in Somalia. In addition, there is access to forged documents in Somalia, which makes verification even more difficult. Despite the birth certificates and Somali passport submitted, the applicant's identity must therefore be regarded as unclear.
Reason for rejection
The court stated that the documents issued by the Somali embassy were only based on the information provided by the plaintiff and therefore did not constitute reliable proof of his identity. In addition, the plaintiff provided different information during previous stays in Italy, which cast further doubt on his identity. These inconsistencies led to the burden of proof being on the plaintiff according to general principles of the burden of proof.
Application for authorisation to appeal
The plaintiff applied for leave to appeal against the judgement of the administrative court, as he asserted the fundamental importance of the case and serious doubts about the correctness of the judgement of the court of first instance. He argued that the documents submitted should be sufficient to clarify his identity and that it would be unreasonable for him to submit further evidence.
Decision of the Higher Administrative Court
The Administrative Court rejected the application for leave to appeal. It followed the opinion of the Administrative Court that Somali documents, such as birth certificates and passports, could not be recognised as reliable proof of identity. These documents should only be regarded as circumstantial evidence, but not as sufficient proof. The court emphasised that previous case law had clarified that Somali civil status certificates and identity documents were unsuitable for establishing identity due to the precarious conditions in Somalia.
Conclusion
The ruling underlines the strict requirements for proof of identity in naturalisation procedures in Germany. Especially in cases where documents are submitted from countries such as Somalia, where forged papers are easily accessible and reliable official registers are lacking, the evidence is severely limited. In this case, the lack of clarity about the identity of the applicant and doubts about the authenticity of the documents submitted meant that naturalisation was not possible.
Important Note: The content of this article has been prepared to the best of our knowledge and belief. However, due to the complexity and constant evolution of the subject matter, we must exclude liability and warranty. Important Notice: The content of this article has been created to the best of our knowledge and understanding. However, due to the complexity and constant changes in the subject matter, we must exclude any liability and warranty.
If you need legal advice, please feel free to call us at 0221 - 80187670 or send us an email at or send an email to info@mth-partner.de info@mth-partner.de
Lawyers in Cologne advise and represent clients nationwide in immigration law.