The myth of the "dual national criminal"

In January, Germany's debate about alleged "criminal foreigners" moved up a gear when the CDU candidate Friedrich Merz argued in an interview in Die Welt that withdrawing citizenship from people with dual nationality should be a legal possibility. Behind his demand lies a broader narrative which places dual nationals in Germany under general suspicion, driven by accusations of disloyalty to the German state and society. 

To be clear: there is no direct link between criminality and national origin. There are, however, various universal risk factors, like gender and age. It is indeed primarily (young) men who commit violent crimes, and other risk factors may correlate with the living conditions of migrants or those with migrant backgrounds. These include poverty, poor access to the labour market and experiences of violence in a country of origin, as criminologist Gina Wollinger explained to the Integration Media Service. 

Much depends on the institutional framework encountered by immigrants on arrival in Germany. If certain groups are banned from working or their educational qualifications are not recognised, it is more likely that they will end up in precarious living conditions, and the risk of crime within these groups is much higher than the average.

"Unauthorised entry" is included in crime statistics

Debates around Ausländerkriminalität (crime committed by foreigners) are often sparked by new statistics that appear to show clear correlations, as was the case in spring 2024 with the publication of police crime statistics (PKS) for 2023. Yet from a criminological perspective, statistics must always be contextualised. The resulting political debate often misses the actual messages of the statistics. 

The Ausländerkriminalität conversation has no basis in fact. When interpreting the statistics, a number of elements need to be considered. For example, it is well known in criminology that people perceived as "foreign" are reported more often than people who are considered white and German. In other words: someone named Ali is more likely to be reported for the same offence as someone named Christian. We also know that racial minorities in public spaces and immigrant neighbourhoods are more likely to be stopped by the police. Where there is more searching and more checking, more is found, as Gina Wollinger confirms. 

Furthermore, some crimes can only be committed by foreigners, such as "illegal entry into federal territory". This descriptor is also used for cases in which people flee their homeland and seek refuge in Germany. These border crossings are included in the statistics as criminal offences, but since Germany is obligated under the Geneva Refugee Convention to review asylum requests from people fleeing persecution, these cases are generally not pursued further by courts. 

The category of "foreigners" also includes a wide range of groups, such as tourists, people seeking asylum (i.e. those who have fled from their home countries) and people who have been living and working here for years who don't have a German passport. These groups often have little or nothing in common. Much more important than a person's passport are their specific circumstances and experiences. There is no blanket danger from "criminal foreigners" or "rising crime rates among foreigners", since nationality itself is not indicative of whether someone will commit a crime. 

Merz's demand has a long history

Withdrawal of citizenship as a political measure is not a new idea, even in a German context. The measure has been implemented in Germany and other European countries, such as the United Kingdom, in the fight against Islamist terrorism. In the UK, it has been possible to withdraw the citizenship of dual nationals since 2002. 

In Germany, under current law, citizenship can be revoked if it was obtained "by unlawful means". This is the case if a person declares their support for a free and democratic basic order when gaining citizenship, but later fights for a foreign terrorist organisation or military. Since 2019, German citizenship has been revoked in a few cases where individuals joined and fought for the Islamic State (IS). 

Since then, there have been several attempts to extend the state's capacity to revoke the citizenship of other groups. In 2023, for example, the interior ministers of the CDU-led states called for crimes which fell under the rubric of "clan crime", or gang-related crime, to be included in the catalogue of offences that can lead to citizenships being revoked. In public debate, the term is often equated with organised crime, but even administrative offences are recorded in state reports on "clan crime". This broad categorisation of deviant behaviour, and its strong association with specific ethnic backgrounds, has been widely criticised by scientists and lawyers. Despite this expansive definition, offences in the "clan crime" category account for only 0.1 to 0.76 percent of all crimes recorded. 

Merz has made a slightly modified demand during the current election campaign. When RTL presenter Pinal Atalay asked him who he meant by the term "criminal foreigners", Merz clarified that his demand was to revoke citizenship if "serious crimes" were committed, for example in the case with "antisemitic riots" at pro-Palestine protests in Berlin. Whether his proposals are legally sound seems to be of little interest to Merz—their legal feasibility is still controversial.

The main priority for Merz is to present this demand as a measure against antisemitism in Germany. The constitutional hurdles for the withdrawal of citizenship in Germany are so high precisely due to the events of the Nazi period when Jews and opponents of the regime were systematically deprived of their citizenship. To now praise the expatriation of Germans with foreign roots as a protective measure against antisemitism seems to be an act of historical amnesia. 

Merz could become an unwitting campaigner for the far-right

For those targeted by these populist narratives, the tone of Friedrich Merz's demands is driving fear and insecurity. Germany’s increasingly anti-immigration and anti-Muslim climate is currently being exacerbated by populist debate about the attacks in Solingen and Magdeburg, and the knife attack in Aschaffenburg. The message is: even if you live and work here, even if you've become a German citizen or are German by birth—you are not part of German society. 

As early as 2018, migration researcher Naika Foroutan warned that the question of migration had become a litmus test for democratic societies. The narrative of the "criminal foreigners" is a popular and dangerous strategy used by politicians to present themselves as saviours or restorers of law and order. In this case, the "criminal dual national" serves as a racist cipher. Merz uses it to make crime a threat from outside—not a German phenomenon, but one that has arisen through immigration. 

The "remigration" plans of Germany's "New Right" intellectual movement—an influential ideological force on the far-right AfD party—include revoking the citizenship of Germans with a migration background, with deportation as the next step. They speak of the alleged "decomposition" or "disintegration of the homogeneous German national body" by "criminal or parasitic foreigners". Even if it is not Friedrich Merz's intention, the implementation of his current demand could become the legal basis for far-right fantasies.