Withdrawal and loss of German citizenship

We assess whether a proposed withdrawal or alleged loss is compatible with the special constitutional protection of German nationality. It is not lost through ordinary changes such as unemployment, divorce or a prolonged stay abroad. Nevertheless, the law provides for certain grounds for loss and for the withdrawal of naturalisation that was unlawfully obtained. Correctly assessing the situation depends on which legal ground is at issue, when the relevant events occurred and whether an administrative decision has already become final and no longer open to challenge.

The current grounds for loss are set out principally in § 17 StAG. They include renunciation, the military or terrorist activities regulated in § 28 and withdrawal under § 35. In addition, § 17 regulates particular consequences for children where the conditions for their acquisition of citizenship by operation of law cease to apply retrospectively. These individual requirements must not be combined into a general power for the authority to undo naturalisation whenever it later disapproves of someone.

The prevention of statelessness is not regulated in the same way for every ground either. Renunciation requires another nationality to exist. Under § 28, the prospect of statelessness prevents loss. By contrast, where unlawful naturalisation was obtained through the specified serious misconduct, § 35 provides that resulting statelessness does not, as a rule, preclude withdrawal. These differences are central to the assessment.

A subsequent separation or divorce does not end German citizenship. The same generally applies to losing a job, illness, lawfully receiving social benefits or moving abroad. The conditions for the original acquisition are not reviewed annually as they would be when renewing a temporary residence permit.

Nor does an identity card expiring or being lost extinguish citizenship. It may create a documentation problem that has to be resolved through a replacement document or further evidence. An authority's mere uncertainty about someone's status does not itself constitute statutory loss either. A status determination procedure may be necessary.

A subsequent criminal offence does not generally lead to citizenship being taken away. Criminal responsibility and citizenship are separate questions. Specific statutory grounds, such as actual participation in combat operations of a terrorist organisation abroad, must be distinguished from this. Later conduct may also provide indications of deception that already existed when citizenship was acquired; however, the particular requirements for withdrawal must be proved.

Under § 35(1) StAG, unlawful naturalisation may be withdrawn only under certain conditions. The provision refers to fraudulent deception, threats or bribery, as well as intentionally incorrect or incomplete information that was material to the decision. A mere error by the authority, or any inaccuracy discovered subsequently, is therefore not sufficient.

We first assess whether the naturalisation was unlawful at all. What specific conduct is alleged? Was there the necessary intent or fraudulent deception? And was the information in question material to the decision? The outcome cannot be inferred solely from the fact that a form would look different today or that someone's circumstances later became less favourable.

Possible areas of concern include knowingly false identity details, forged evidence material to the decision or the deliberate concealment of relevant facts. Which information was required at the time depends on the applicable law and the particular route to citizenship. A translation error or misunderstanding therefore does not automatically justify the same allegation as deliberately manipulated documents.

A more detailed assessment is provided in fraudulently obtained naturalisation, consequences for family members and legal protection.

Under § 35(3), withdrawal is generally permitted only until the expiry of ten years after notification of naturalisation. This period must be distinguished from the deadline for an administrative objection or court action and from any subsequent bar on naturalisation. For older naturalisations, the rules applicable at the time and possible transitional issues must also be examined.

Even where the withdrawal conditions are met, we examine the required exercise of discretion; withdrawal is not automatic. The authority must exercise its discretion lawfully and consider the relevant circumstances. These may include the consequences for the person concerned and their family. An actual possibility of holding or reacquiring another nationality must be distinguished from a mere assumption that such a possibility exists.

§ 35(6) provides that German citizenship is lost retrospectively once the withdrawal decision is final and no longer open to challenge. Finality and immediate enforceability are different procedural concepts. We assess the withdrawal decision and additional orders, such as document orders, separately. It would be wrong to equate the first opportunity to respond with a definitive loss of citizenship.

If withdrawal affects other administrative acts concerning citizenship, § 35(5) generally requires a separate discretionary decision for each person affected. Participation in the misconduct and interests deserving protection must be weighed against each other; the child's best interests must expressly be considered. The formula “one parent loses citizenship, so the whole family loses it” is therefore legally unsound.

Separate rules also apply to children who acquired citizenship by operation of law, for example by descent or birth in Germany. § 17(2) may apply here if the relevant basis for acquisition ceases to exist retrospectively. The law contains protective limits, including where a parent-child relationship with a German parent continues, another basis for acquisition by birth exists or statelessness would result.

Where a parent's naturalisation is withdrawn, an affected child who acquired citizenship by operation of law is protected from their fifth birthday onwards, measured at the point when the relevant decision becomes final and no longer open to challenge. This is the situation covered by § 17(2), sentence 2, no. 1(e). It must be distinguished from point (b): where the immigration authority's consents or determinations concerning acknowledgement of paternity under § 85d AufenthG are withdrawn as specified there, this particular age protection does not apply. The other protective grounds must still be examined separately. The exception concerning acknowledgement of paternity does not remove the age protection where a parent's naturalisation is withdrawn. For a child who was themselves naturalised, § 35(5) is the relevant provision instead.

A German citizen with multiple nationalities may renounce German citizenship under the conditions in § 26 StAG. A mere statement to friends, returning a passport or deregistering a home does not achieve this. Renunciation must be declared in writing and requires approval from the competent citizenship authority.

Loss occurs when the renunciation certificate is handed over. The law provides specific grounds for refusing approval, and exceptions, for certain public-law service relationships and people subject to military service obligations. For minors and certain represented adults, additional court approvals and consent requirements apply. The decision therefore cannot be based solely on making travel arrangements easier.

Before renunciation, we explain the residence and career consequences and the need to establish that the other nationality will continue securely. Anyone who later wishes to become German again cannot simply reactivate the old certificate. Further details can be found under other grounds for loss and renunciation.

§ 28 StAG covers two different situations. The first concerns voluntarily joining the armed forces or a comparable armed organisation of another state whose nationality the person also holds, without the required German consent. The second concerns actual participation in combat operations of a terrorist organisation abroad.

Not every job abroad or every contact with military bodies satisfies such a ground. In the case of foreign military service, voluntariness, nationality of the other state, the type of organisation and any existing consents are particularly important. General consents or agreements between states may be relevant. Before a commitment, we assess the specific nationality-law position.

Loss under § 28 does not occur if the person is still a minor or would otherwise become stateless. For terrorist combat operations, the law also contains special rules on the authority's determination and legal protection where the person is abroad. These special rules must not be applied to every withdrawal under § 35 without examination.

Since 27 June 2024, acquiring another nationality on application no longer, by itself, causes the loss of German citizenship under German law. The former permission to retain German citizenship is no longer required for this purpose. The former obligation to choose between nationalities has also ceased to apply. People being naturalised today therefore do not need to plan on the basis of the former rules aimed at avoiding multiple nationality.

For events before the reform, we assess the law applicable at the time. A loss that occurred earlier is not automatically reversed by the change in the law. Particular points to examine include the actual date on which the foreign nationality was acquired, the application circumstances at the time, possible exceptions and any permission to retain German citizenship. A newly issued passport may merely document a historical acquisition date without itself being the act of acquisition.

The fact that multiple nationality is now permitted also does not guarantee that another nationality will continue under that country's own law. Multiple nationality and consequences in the country of origin explains this separate assessment.

If losing German citizenship would also mean losing EU citizenship, a particular proportionality assessment may be required. The actual consequences for the person concerned and their family are relevant, for example for working and family life across borders. Merely finding that the wording of a national ground for loss is satisfied does not answer every question of EU law in every case.

§ 30(1), sentence 4 StAG regulates this assessment in cases of statutory loss. According to its wording, sentence 5 excludes cases in which no application to avert loss was made or such an application was rejected. However, this exception must not be applied where there was no effective access to a proportionality assessment under EU law or that assessment was not carried out. It must then be conducted in the administrative or court proceedings. Failure to apply for permission to retain citizenship is therefore not sufficient to refuse the assessment across the board.

If the assessment establishes disproportionate consequences of loss, continued possession or retrospective reacquisition of citizenship must be made possible. This requires an individual assessment and does not reverse all earlier losses across the board. This clarification of status differs from a new naturalisation, which generally takes effect only for the future. Establishing and proving existing citizenship explains the procedure. Where fraudulently obtained naturalisation is withdrawn, the balancing exercise required under EU law remains separately necessary within the withdrawal assessment.

Anyone who still holds another EU nationality does not lose every basis for EU citizenship when German citizenship ends. This starting position must therefore also be established. A general reference to “European rights” does not replace a precise account of the legal positions actually affected.

The ten-year withdrawal period is not a waiting period after which every subsequent naturalisation immediately becomes possible. § 35a StAG provides for a separate ten-year exclusion. It is triggered, in particular, by a final withdrawal under § 35 that is no longer open to challenge. In addition, the bar may arise when the citizenship authority establishes the dishonest conduct described in the law while naturalisation proceedings are still ongoing. This second variant does not require German citizenship to have been acquired previously.

Here too, not every error may be equated with a ground for a bar. For incorrect or incomplete information, the current provision requires intentional conduct concerning material naturalisation requirements. The determination made during ongoing proceedings is immediately enforceable by law; an ordinary legal challenge therefore does not automatically stop its effects. To identify the appropriate response, the decision, the nature of the allegation and, where relevant, the possibility of interim judicial relief must be examined.

For our assessment, we examine the original application, later submissions and certificates and arrange the relevant events chronologically. We document your relatives' individual acquisition routes separately. Our statements rely on established facts, not assumptions or unchecked information.

After an actual loss, we also clarify with you the consequences for residence rights and documents. An earlier residence permit does not simply revive automatically. Special residence rules may be relevant for former German citizens, and their requirements and deadlines need to be examined separately. Similarly, a later naturalisation is a separate procedure. The detailed article on renewed naturalisation and exclusion periods explains in particular the ten-year bar under § 35a StAG, which is separate from the withdrawal period. The overview of completion and consequences provides the broader context.