Report on Citizenship Law: Germany 2.7. Reforms between 2015 and 2019: In November 2016, the Federal Administration Office’s competence to document administrative decisions on matters of citizenship has been extended. While, prior to November 2016, the Federal Administration Office was only competent to document information about decisions on the loss of citizenship (§33 Nationality Act), it may now collect information about decisions on the existence and continuance of citizenship. It had been able to register the date, but now moreover is able in addition to register the legal basis for the acquisition or loss of citizenship. In a person’s file it can now register whether there is an information ban regarding personal information. An information ban arises in circumstances where the registration office comes to the conclusion that a person does not need to share personal information (e.g. their habitual residence), because this could lead to dangers for the person’s life, health, personal freedom or similarly important rights, §51 BMG (Federal Registration Law). Also, since May 2017, if a person can become a German citizen on the basis of ius soli, the registration office has to forward to the competent nationality authority whether there is an information lock in the sense of §51 BMG. Substantial and widely controversial changes to the Nationality Act were made in August 2019. The amendment had been instigated by a public debate about German citizens who voluntarily joined the Islamic State. The government wanted to allow for a withdrawal of citizenship and introduced the legal grounds for such a withdrawal in §28 StAG with the parliamentary votes of the CDU/CSU and SPD. The amendment faced strong criticism in political discourse. Anyone who ‘concretely participates in the fighting of a terrorist organisation abroad’, will now lose his/her German citizenship. Such participation is considered as an act which is disloyal to Germany and the conduct of such persons is considered to be seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of Germany according to the reasoning provided by the legislator in the draft bill. Given that Art. 16 Basic Law prohibits loss of nationality if this renders the person stateless, withdrawal of citizenship is only possible if the person has dual citizenship. This condition in particular caused a lot of criticism. It is argued that the German citizenship in combination with another citizenship has become a second-class citizenship by means of the amendment as only holders of one single passport are protected against withdrawal. It has also been argued that Germany is shifting problems with its own citizens to other countries in order to render participation in the IS a ‘foreign’ problem. Before August 2019, there had been already a corresponding regulation relating to entry into the official armed forces of another country. Another amendment that received wide criticism was passed in August 2019 concerning §35 (3) StAG. According to the new regulation the period within which newly acquired citizenship may be withdrawn has been extended from five to ten years in cases of identity fraud. This amendment is accompanied by the amendment of §8 (1) StAG according to which a person can only be naturalised by discretion if their identity and former nationality are known. As naturalisation now also requires a complete proof of identity, many refugees could not become German citizens in the foreseeable future. The lack of a hardship clause for this group has been subject to criticism. There are also new requirements for naturalisation. The citizenship law of August 2019 introduced an additional condition for naturalisation under §10 StAG: Applicants to German citizenship need to prove their ‘integration into conditions of life in Germany’ (‘deutsche Lebensverhältnisse’), in particular they have to prove that they are ‘not married to several spouses at the same time’. Up until then it was only necessary to effectively commit to 16 RSCAS/GLOBALCIT-CR 2020/5- © 2020 Author(s)