German Court Rules: Polygamy Not Against the Constitution

An original translation from Stuttgarter Zeitung by Egri Nök.

German Top Court Decides:
German Passport And Two Wives: Both Is Permittable
By Eberhard Wein
August 27, 2017

According to the Koran, a man can marry a second woman; but in Germany, too, this is not against the constitution. At least this is what the two highest administrative law judges say. Photo: ‘Arab with Three Wives and Two Servants’, Wikimedia Commons

A Syrian, who is married to two wives, can still become a German national. The city of Karlsruhe cannot revoke his naturalization, the administative court says.

Karlsruhe – if you contract a second marriage abroad, you can still be a good and loyal citizen. This is the gist of a verdict of the administrative court (VGH) in Mannheim. The highest administrative law judges of the country repealed a contrarian decision by the administrative court Karlsruhe. The city of Karlsruhe had revoked German citizenship from a native of Syria, after it surfaced that he had married a second wife in his old homeland.
The 36 year old Kurd came to Germany in 1999, studied and became a construction engineer in 2008. He married a German that same year, and applied for German citizenship shortly thereafter. At the naturalization test, he scored 33 out of 33 possible points. He received his naturalization certificate in October 2010.

Shortly after the wedding he married a second wife
In 2010, 2013 and 2015, three children were born. But then the man recognized fatherhood for another child born in Damascus in 2012. What surfaced now led to the city of Karlsruhe revoking the naturalization. The man allegedly had married another woman in Syria, already in June 2008, only seven weeks after his marriage in Germany. The charge is that he had given incomplete information in his application.
In the verdict, the administrative court leaves open the question if the plaintiff gained naturalization by willful deceit. It is true that the application form only asked for “previous marriages” and not “additional marriages”. Still, the judges of the previous instance were not wrong to say that a second marriage should have been stated “all the more”. But at the same time, the senate does not share the administrative court’s opinion that the principle of singular marriage was part of the constitution.

Marriage saved woman from ostracism
The city of Karlsruhe had argued that polygamy violated the dignity of man as guaranteed in article 1 [of the German constitution – translator] – in the judges’ opinion “an absolutely unique legal opinion”. They pointed to a decision by the administrative court Regensburg: Who violates the principle of single marriage, is not necessary an “enemy of the constitution”, it said “boldly and correctly”.
In the case at hand, the court also acknowledged the special circumstances. The plaintiff said that he had married the woman, his cousin, because their affair from the year 2006, was busted. Only this way he were able to save her from social ostracism in Syria. His Muslim belief allowed a multiple marriage. At the same time, he admitted, he could not imagine to be one of several husbands.

Case of fundamental importance
After detours over Istanbul, Abu Dhabi and Sweden, the wife now lives in Karlsruhe, too, but in an apartment of her own. His first wife always knew of her, allegedly. There would be no marital contact. The city of Karlsruhe already lodged an appeal against the verdict. The administrative court allowed the revision at the Federal Administrative Court. „We deem the clarification of this legal matter of fundamental importance for generality and consistency”, a townsspeaker said.
(File Reference 12 S 2216/14).

6 Replies to “German Court Rules: Polygamy Not Against the Constitution”

  1. Can’t wait until a German law expert will explain, that the German Basic Law is essentially Islamic, they just badly translated/interpreted in the past…

  2. Just another parasite and the German gov’t can’t seem to get enough of them.
    He married his cousin? I think under US law you are not allowed to marry your cousin because of the inherent birth defects that follow, just ask the NHS in the UK.
    But the Germans are intent on destroying their nation. So yeah, marry your cousin and the German worker will pay your freight… And the courts and legislature will support you.
    Right now I am listening to bell practise out my window at the local Pres. church. What a lovely sound… I will miss it when they are silenced.

    • In most states this depends on how closely related, some will allow 3rd cousins to marry and some won’t. cousins further out then that are normally allowed.

  3. It’s a mad mad mad mad Europe. These backward cultures use women as baby machines, and herein lies the demographic demise of the West.
    And not only Europe.
    In Australia the former Human Rights Commissioner, pompous leftist Gillian Triggs, who was relieved of her post by the present government, and was herself the prestigious Challis Professor of International Law at Sydney University, has called for Muslims to be able to practice Sharia in Australia, despite its subjugation of women.

  4. Aw heck guys, if a couple decides they want a third to join them, who the heck are we to tell people what to do with their own lives and bodies? Didn’t the Pilgrims come here to escape forced religion? If we’re a “free” country, stop trying to control what people do to THEMSELVES. If people want to jump into the Marianas Trench, that’s their prerogative. If this Syrian immigrated to a free country and his religion allows a second wife, so long as he doesn’t violate laws like domestic violence, it’s their choice to be the religion he is. I despise the Jihadists whom I’ve seen act like they’re not even human, cutting off the heads of someone fully awake with a rusty kitchen knife, with no drugs, that they’ve just knelt down and are video taping. I served our country in Iraq and Afghanistan and Kuwait so don’t mistake my statements as weak or even anti religion. I haven’t heard of a god who says you are forced to believe in him/her/whatever. Isn’t everyone given the choice whether or not to believe in Christianity, for example? So if God says we have a choice, who the heck is man to tell another man or woman they can’t have another spouse? To take it even further, who are we to tell a person they can’t hurt themselves? If we’re not hurting others without their permission, we should have the freedom to do what we want. I wear a seatbelt because it makes me feel secure, but if someone else has the insurance to cover his medical costs regardless of wearing a seatbelt, and Joe Public isn’t going to have to foot the bill, then why force the person to wear a belt? Now sure, there can be other factors to consider, like if there was a study done that if a seatbelt isn’t worn someone could lose control of their car. If something like that is the case, obviously if it is likely to hurt or kill others, without their permission mind you, then I can see that control being placed. So two wives or husbands? Why not?! If the other doesn’t like it, he or she is free to leave. That’s between those 3 people, not the senate or the police or the neighborhood. Let’s let freedom ring. This is what I served our wonderful country for, to be fair and free. I thought that’s what America was to become (barring what we did to the Indians etc).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *