Facts
The complainants, A. and others, had submitted their naturalization applications to the political municipality of Rheineck. The municipal assembly rejected the applications despite a positive assessment by the naturalization committee. The Department of the Interior lifted the rejecting decisions and instructed the municipality to re-examine the applications. The municipal assembly again rejected the applications without sufficient justification. The complainants lodged a complaint with the Department, which lifted the rejecting decisions and referred the matter back to the municipality. The complainants then lodged a complaint with the Administrative Court, which did not entertain the complaint. The complainants finally lodged a constitutional complaint with the Federal Court.
The complainants argue that the municipal assembly rejected their naturalization applications without sufficient justification and that the Department and the Administrative Court violated their rights by not deciding on the matter.
Considerations
The Federal Court must examine whether the complainants have a legally protected interest in the annulment or modification of the contested decision. The complainants invoke human dignity, the prohibition of discrimination, the duty to provide reasons, and the prohibition of arbitrariness.
The Federal Court finds that the complainants have a legally protected interest in the annulment or modification of the contested decision, as they can complain about the violation of federal constitutional procedural guarantees as parties to the cantonal proceedings.
The Federal Court further examines whether the Department has the competence…