Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

No handshake, no citizenship – but with a second wife, everything’s fine?

April 23, 2018/2 Comments/in Views/by Jan von Hein
image_pdfimage_print

Two recent judgments of European courts have highlighted the difficulty in finding the right balance between the cultural assimilation of Muslim immigrants demanded by national laws on citizenship and the necessary degree of tolerance towards foreign laws and customs. In a widely reported decision of 11 April 2018, the French Council of State (Conseil d’Etat) ruled that a naturalisation of an Algerian-born woman could be revoked because she had refused to shake hands with a male public servant during the naturalisation ceremony.

The Council evaluated her behaviour as proof that she was obviously not sufficiently assimilated to French culture in order to become a French citizen. In sharp contrast to this restrictive attitude, the High Administrative Court of Baden-Württemberg (Germany), in an earlier decision of 25 April 2017, allowed the naturalisation of a Syrian-born man to be upheld although it turned out that he had lied to German authorities about the fact that he had entered into a polygamous marriage abroad. The court argued that the appellant’s polygamous marriage as such did not amount to a violation of German public policy, which, in the context of naturalisation, is a rather narrowly phrased concept that presupposes a lack of loyalty to the German constitutional order. From a traditional choice of law point of view, however, there are rather convincing arguments for assuming a violation of German public policy: the husband’s first wife was a German national, and both spouses had their habitual residence in Germany, thus creating a very strong connection with the German legal order and its constitutional values on equality of the sexes. The case is now pending before the German Supreme Administrative Court in Leipzig.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Jan von Hein https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Jan von Hein2018-04-23 15:42:012018-08-11 14:49:11No handshake, no citizenship – but with a second wife, everything’s fine?
2 replies
  1. Bartczak says:
    May 1, 2018 at 9:35 pm

    Ref. decision of 25 April 2017, “The court argued that the appellant’s polygamous marriage as such did not amount to a violation of German public policy”, did the same court ever refer to the fact that appellant had lied to German authorities about ? Wasn’t that a violation acording to Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz ?

  2. Jan von Hein says:
    May 2, 2018 at 1:36 pm

    Not according to the court’s reasoning: Since the polygamous marriage did not constitute a violation of public policy, the judges argue, the German authorities would have been obliged to naturalise the appellant anyway, i.e. even if he had disclosed his second marriage to them. Insofar, the court left open the problem whether the question relating to “former” marriages in the German application form encompasses “other” (i.e. simultaneously existing) marriages of an already married applicant as well. Although it seems plausible that the German legislature did not include the latter question simply because German law does not recognise polygamy, interpretations may differ on this point, because German social security law, for example, does contain an explicit provision on polygamous marriages validly concluded under a foreign law. On the other hand, granting social security benefits to an alien and his two (or more) wives is one thing, naturalising him may be quite another…

Comments are closed.

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
  • The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate June 6, 2026
  • Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case June 3, 2026
  • China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition May 29, 2026
Link to: The Foundation of Choice of Law: Choice and Equality Link to: The Foundation of Choice of Law: Choice and Equality The Foundation of Choice of Law: Choice and Equality Link to: Diplomat Lawyer Vacancy at the Permanent Bureau of the HCCH Link to: Diplomat Lawyer Vacancy at the Permanent Bureau of the HCCH Diplomat Lawyer Vacancy at the Permanent Bureau of the HCCH
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top