Report on Citizenship Law: Germany One of the central issues of the German nationality law of 1999/2000 was that of dual nationality, the avoidance of which had hitherto been an essential element of the German nationality law. Following a highly emotional debate on dual nationality, the reform of 1999/2000 maintained the principle of avoiding dual nationality. Today, the general rule is that a foreigner is not obliged to renounce his or her previous nationality if renunciation entails serious disadvantages or is dependent upon particularly difficult conditions. Therefore, the nationality law closely follows the pattern of other European states by admitting dual nationality more generously. In addition to the many dual nationals by birth, today dual nationality is accepted in almost 60 per cent of all naturalisations.44 Due to the fact that children usually acquire the nationality of their parents by descent, the introduction of the ius soli principle will entail at least dual, if not multiple nationalities for foreign children born in Germany. Since, despite this development, the issue of dual nationality hasremained a politically controversial concept, the nationality law of 2000 used the ‘optional model’, which obliges foreign children to decide by the end of their eighteenth year which nationality to keep and which to renounce. If they declare the wish to keep the foreign nationality or if they do not declare anything by the end of their 23rd year, German nationality will be lost within a specified period of time. If they declare an intention to keep German nationality, however, they are obliged to prove the loss or renunciation of their foreign nationality until their 23th birthday, unless the German authorities have formally approved the retention thereof. They can apply for permission to retain their former nationality until their 21st birthday. Permission will be granted if renunciation of the foreign nationality is either impossible or unreasonably burdensome, or if multiple nationality would have to be accepted according to the general rules on naturalisation. Whether the ‘optional model’ in its initial version has been compatible with Article 3 para. 1 and 16 para. 2 of the Basic Law, was controversial in the literature (see, for a critical view, Wallrabenstein 1999: 223 ff.; 2007: 5 ff.; Farahat 2012: chap. 6 A.I.; Niesler 2007; Göbel-Zimmermann/Eichhorn 2010a: 296; for a different view see Hailbronner, NVwZ 1999, 1273; Berlit , GK-StAR, §29 StAG, Rn.13-28; Masing 2004, in Dreier (ed.), Grundgesetz Bd.1, Art. 16, Rn.71). Naturalisation under Section 8 of the nationality law is in principle dependent upon the non-existence of a reason that would justify expulsion, and on the capability to earn a living. The Immigration Act has considerably expanded previously existing possibilities for making exceptions to these requirements. Previously, it was only possible to make an exception to the requirement of the capability of earning a living in the case of aliens up to the age of 23 or aliens who were unable to earn a living through no fault of their own. The new provision provides discretionary exceptions for reasons of public interest or to avoid a particular hardship. This enables a considerably larger amount of discretion (Renner 2004:176, 179). The particular hardship clause requires unusual disadvantages or difficulties in the case of non-naturalisation. Since the new provisions enable a weighing of interests (public interest or particular individual hardships) it will be possible to take into account the reasons for dependence on social benefits and the degree of dependence on social welfare. Similar considerations apply when making an exception to the requirement of the absence of criminal conviction. The discretionary clause, however, applies only if there is no individual right to naturalisation 44 According to statistical data from 2018 by the Federal Office of Statistics, see: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/MigrationIntegration/Publikationen/Downloads-Migration/einbuergerungen2010210187004.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4#page=134 18 RSCAS/GLOBALCIT-CR 2020/5- © 2020 Author(s)