Passport as the primary evidence

We examine your national passport as the primary evidence of identity in naturalisation proceedings and clarify possible inconsistencies with other records. It contains not merely a photograph and a name, but a statement by the issuing state about the person and their nationality. Within the tiered model, the passport has a separate priority over identity cards and passport substitutes. However, this priority does not amount to an unconditional passport requirement in every personal situation.

A national passport is issued by the state whose nationality the person holds. It links details such as names, date of birth and place of birth to a photograph and other identifying features. At the same time, the issuing state generally confirms that the holder is one of its nationals. A passport can therefore answer several questions that would otherwise require separate evidence in naturalisation proceedings.

The passport’s international function and security features are also important. The standardised presentation of information makes it easier to link records across languages and national borders. Particularly for names originally written in a different alphabet, the Latin-script spelling used in the passport is highly significant when comparing different documents.

This does not mean that every passport conclusively answers every biographical question. For example, a passport does not always contain the complete history of a person’s name or all the details of their parentage. Following a marriage or a name change, or where earlier data conflict, additional certificates may be necessary. The passport is the primary starting point; the precise scope of what it establishes still needs to be examined.

A national passport and a national identity card may contain many similar details. Nevertheless, they belong to different tiers within the model. An identity card therefore cannot replace a passport that can be obtained merely because it is an official document, without further justification.

Conversely, placing an identity card on the second tier does not mean that there is an unconditional obligation to obtain a passport. Possibility and reasonableness must still be assessed individually. If obtaining a passport is impossible or unreasonable, the evidential value of an existing identity card must be considered at the tier provided for it. The ranking of a document and the duty to obtain it are therefore two related but separate questions.

We compare the personal details in your current passport with the naturalisation application and other documents. We include earlier passports where they can explain name changes or spelling differences. Where you hold several citizenships, we assess all available passports, not only the most recently used travel document.

For the authority’s comparison, the relevant pages must be reproduced legibly and in full. Alongside the personal data page, these may include official additions, extensions or name annotations. The form in which they must be submitted depends on the specific proceedings. An uploaded photograph may be used for initial processing, but does not automatically replace a later request to inspect the original.

We explain damaged or illegible pages when submitting the document. The same applies if the original is held by another authority or was withdrawn when a new passport was issued. An existing copy can then document its previous contents while enquiries are made about whether the original can be obtained from the authority or its earlier issue confirmed. The form of submission and the evidential weight of the contents are separate questions.

A passport may have expired and still contain information about the identity previously recorded. Its expiry date does not erase its historical evidential value. However, this does not create a general right to base naturalisation exclusively on an old passport if a current one can reasonably be obtained or changes to personal details or nationality need to be clarified.

Conversely, a document is not sufficient without qualification simply because it has not yet expired. It must be a suitable state-issued document, capable of being linked to the correct person and reliable in the particular context. Questions of recognition may also depend on the document type, the issuing state and, where applicable, special conditions for recognition. Whether a document may be used to cross a border and what evidential value it has in naturalisation proceedings are related but not entirely identical questions.

We clarify with the authority which information an old passport does not yet establish: current citizenship, a current photograph, unchanged name or reliability of its earlier issue. We use that specific assessment objective to determine whether renewal or supplementary evidence is needed.

Three aspects can be distinguished when assessing a passport:

1. Was the document actually issued by the body stated, and has it remained free of subsequent falsification?

2. Does it belong to the person presenting it?

3. Are the details it contains correct? A document that shows no signs of irregularity may answer the first question while the others still require clarification.

Even genuine documents can contain incorrect information. This may become relevant, for example, where there is reliable information about serious deficiencies in a country’s civil registration or document system. In such cases, the specific evidential value must be examined more carefully. This does not mean that documents belonging to everyone from a particular state are automatically false. The document submitted and the relevant circumstances must still be assessed.

An appropriate response to a request for further evidence therefore starts with identifying exactly what is being checked. If it concerns the issuing procedure, information about the documents submitted at the time may be relevant. If it concerns different dates of birth, the origins of those dates in particular must be explained. Another copy of the same passport does not resolve a substantive discrepancy.

The spelling of a name may vary when moving between writing systems. Multiple given names, sequences of names or different divisions between given names and surnames also sometimes lead to differing entries. Such differences must be explained clearly so that the authority can link the documents to the same person.

The passport is important evidence of the registered name. However, it does not replace an examination of a legally effective name change or differing rules governing names. Since the reform of naming law on 1 May 2025, a blanket statement that nationality alone always determines the applicable naming law would be incorrect. Information is provided by the Federal Foreign Office on the reform of naming law.

We compare the original spelling, passport spelling and German register entries. We document an official name change with the relevant certificate. If a translation renders the name differently from the passport, we clarify whether this is merely a transliteration difference or genuinely different name information.

It is not helpful to alter documents yourself or conceal earlier spellings when answering enquiries. The correct connection is established through a clear explanation. For further questions, particularly differing dates of birth and earlier false statements, the article Correcting differing names, dates of birth and earlier statements explains the necessary distinctions.

Existing copies, earlier visa documents or passport data stored by authorities may help establish which documents were previously held. We connect this evidence with the last known date of possession and the steps taken to obtain a replacement. If obtaining a new passport proves unsuccessful, the specific reason matters.

A distinction must be drawn between a mere processing delay, a missing supporting document and a definitive or practical inability to obtain a passport. A pending passport application may require further assessment by the authority. It neither automatically justifies an immediate move to the final tier of evidence nor an indefinite wait without consideration of the available alternatives.

According to case law, the passport’s priority also applies in principle to naturalisation proceedings involving recognised refugees. At the same time, personal dangers and other specific obstacles to obtaining it must be taken into account. Protection status therefore replaces neither the assessment of identity nor the individual assessment of reasonableness.

Contact made for the administrative purpose of obtaining documents at the request of a German authority does not generally, in itself, amount to voluntarily re-availing oneself of the protection of the country of origin. This is not a blanket assurance that any contact or travel is harmless. Risks to the person concerned or to third parties and the specific circumstances must still be assessed separately.

If you fear concrete risks, we set out their grounds clearly before any possible embassy contact. A blanket instruction to visit the embassy regardless of the circumstances fails to meet the required assessment just as much as the assumption that recognised refugee status rules out all attempts to obtain documents. This is discussed in more detail in Passport requests for refugees and contact with the embassy of the country of origin.

A German travel document for refugees enables travel and may identify its holder. However, it does not confirm in the same way as a national passport that the issuing state regards the person as its national. In addition, the personal details it contains may be based on the holder’s own statements.

An annotation to that effect therefore influences its evidential value. Conversely, the absence of such an annotation does not conclusively bind the naturalisation authority. The basis on which the document was issued must still be considered. The article Recognised passport substitutes and official identity documents bearing a photograph explains the conditions under which such documents may be used at the second tier.

For several passports, we identify each document’s issuing state and the citizenship it is intended to prove. Holding two nationalities at the same time is compatible with having a single personal identity. Different spellings must be capable of being linked to the same person; the current acceptance of multiple nationality does not remove this task.

A replacement passport may make previously missing evidence available again. Earlier efforts to obtain it do not thereby become worthless, but the decision also takes the new position into account. If obtaining a passport remains impossible, the article Evidence where a passport is missing or unobtainable points to the appropriate alternatives. A newly issued passport must therefore be assessed on the basis of its specific contents: it may fill a gap, confirm an earlier detail or reveal a contradiction.