Judgment Thurgau Administrative Court overturns decision of the Grand Council
The Thurgau Administrative Court has overturned a decision by the cantonal parliament. This rejected the naturalization application of a Syrian. The administrative court has now instructed the parliament to grant the man citizenship.
15.10.2025, 09:44
SDA
A 47-year-old man from Syria has been fighting for years to become Swiss. In 2018, he applied for naturalization in Romanshorn TG. The authorities rejected it. The reason given was that his financial circumstances were not in order due to advance alimony payments of CHF 11,500.
The man fought this up to the Federal Supreme Court. In 2023, after a five-year dispute, the court ruled that the negative naturalization decision was "untenable and arbitrary". The man, who has lived in Switzerland since 2006, should be naturalized, the Federal Court instructed the municipality of Romanshorn. This ultimately approved his application.
Cantonal parliament disregards federal court ruling
In Thurgau, naturalization applications have to clear their final hurdle in the Grand Council, where cantonal citizenship is finally granted. There, the Syrian once again met with resistance. Parliament rejected his application by 72 votes to 42.
Due to the continuing debt from the alimony advance, it could still not be assumed that his financial circumstances were in order. The man was poorly integrated both socially and economically, explained a spokesperson for the SVP. He did not meet the Thurgau requirements for naturalization. Parliament thus placed cantonal law above the decision of the Federal Supreme Court.
The Syrian then appealed to the Thurgau Administrative Court. The court has now returned the case to the cantonal parliament and instructed it to grant the man Thurgau cantonal citizenship.
"With a certain reservation regarding economic integration", he fulfils all naturalization requirements, according to the ruling. The refusal was based on an imbalance in the consideration of the material naturalization requirements.
The ruling is not yet legally binding.
