The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has submitted a comprehensive motion to the German Bundestag calling for substantial restrictions to Germany's naturalization laws, citing what it describes as unsustainable increases in citizenship grants and insufficient integration requirements.
The parliamentary motion, formally titled "A Real Immigration Turnaround Requires Reformed Naturalization Policy," addresses what the AfD characterizes as a critical gap in the federal government's migration policy reforms. According to the document, naturalization policy has remained largely unchanged despite broader migration policy adjustments, with only the rarely-used three-year residence pathway being eliminated.
The numbers driving this legislative push are striking. Germany processed 291,955 naturalizations in 2024, representing a 46 percent increase from the previous year and marking a new historical peak. Early reports from major naturalization authorities in city-states suggest this trend is accelerating, with some jurisdictions reporting additional increases of up to 50 percent in 2025 compared to 2024 levels.
The motion highlights that the most frequently naturalized nationals come from major asylum-origin countries, with Syrian citizens at the forefront. In 2024 alone, 83,150 Syrians were granted German citizenship, accounting for 28 percent of all naturalizations. This concentration among asylum-seekers from specific countries forms a central concern in the AfD's argument.
The party contends that these naturalizations are occurring at a time when changed political conditions in Syria would enable safe returns for most Syrian refugees. The motion references several administrative court rulings, including decisions from the Administrative Court of Düsseldorf in November 2025 and the Administrative Court of Regensburg in January 2026, which the party claims support this assessment of Syria's current safety.
At the heart of the AfD's criticism are comprehensive reforms introduced by the previous coalition government, which the party pejoratively refers to as the "Ampelregierung" (traffic light coalition). These reforms significantly relaxed naturalization requirements in two major ways.
First, the mandatory residence period in Germany was reduced from eight years to five years before applicants could qualify for citizenship. Second, the reforms established dual citizenship as the standard practice, abandoning the previous expectation that applicants would generally renounce their original nationality.
The AfD argues these changes have created what it terms "mass naturalizations" that strain Germany's housing market, healthcare system, education infrastructure, and internal security apparatus. The party contends that only by substantially reducing third-country national immigration can these overburdened structures be effectively relieved.
The motion frames its proposals within specific constitutional and legal arguments. It asserts that much of the migration since 2015 was illegal because arrivals came from safe third countries, allegedly violating Article 16a, Section 2, Sentence 1 of the German Basic Law in conjunction with Section 18, Paragraph 2, Number 1 of the Asylum Act, while also disregarding the jurisdiction rules of the Dublin III Regulation.
The party emphasizes that asylum should function as temporary protection until the grounds for protection cease to exist, citing Section 71 of the Asylum Act as mandating revocation of protected status when conditions change. Therefore, the motion argues, asylum procedures and subsequently granted protection status should not count as creditable residence time in naturalization proceedings.
The AfD's motion makes four specific demands to the federal government:
First, reverse the 2024 reforms by restoring the eight-year residence requirement and raising language proficiency standards from the current B1 level to B2 on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. The motion also calls for substantially reducing exceptions to both language requirements and self-sufficiency obligations.
Second, implement more effective screening to ensure German citizenship is granted only to persons who align with constitutional principles and central societal values. The motion does not specify what additional screening mechanisms should entail.
Third, exclude time spent in Germany under asylum or subsidiary protection from counting toward residence duration requirements under the Nationality Act. This would effectively restart the residency clock for refugees only after they transition to another status.
Fourth, prohibit naturalization entirely for individuals who entered Germany illegally, regardless of their subsequent status or integration.
This represents the AfD's third legislative attempt this term to restrict naturalization policy, following earlier motions documented as parliamentary papers 21/223 and 21/3024. The justification section emphasizes urgency, noting that naturalizations, once granted, are irreversible except under narrowly defined circumstances outlined in Sections 17, 28, and 35 of the Nationality Act.
The motion was submitted by party leaders Dr. Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla along with numerous AfD parliamentary members. It explicitly appeals to all Bundestag members to act according to their conscience, as guaranteed under Article 38, Paragraph 1, Sentence 2 of the Basic Law, which establishes that representatives are bound only by their conscience and not by mandates.
Whether this motion gains traction beyond the AfD's own parliamentary faction remains to be seen, but it clearly establishes the party's position that Germany's current naturalization trajectory represents what it considers a threat requiring immediate legislative intervention.
From breaking news to thought-provoking opinion pieces, our newsletter keeps you informed & engaged.
