The cantonal court in Jura has ruled in favour of a man who was denied Swiss citizenship on the grounds that he mowed the lawn during public holidays. The court argued that the complaints of locals were not grounds for refusing naturalisation.

Juran town the centre of a Swiss citizenship scandal

In this case, our story starts in 2024, when the Frenchman in the Jura town of Clos du Doubs was applying for citizenship. After getting approval at the cantonal and municipal level, his case was heard by locals on March 27. 

Unlike larger towns, which have dedicated and specialised naturalisation committees to hear cases, Clos du Doubs decides citizenship applications via a community assembly. Unfortunately, at a vote which saw two other residents approved for a Swiss passport, the then 50-year-old former Parisian was rejected by 13 votes to 11.

Man's mowing habits grounds for refusing citizenship, says local assembly

In the decision, locals in the assembly said that he had failed to fully integrate into the community. As evidence they used the idea that he was not visible and present enough in village life, his house was under construction for too long and, most famously, that he mowed the lawn during public holidays.

At the time, Clos du Doubs Mayor Jean-Paul Lachat said he was angry with the decision, telling 20 Minuten that the incident harmed the image of the town as a good place for new expats. Later, the Frenchman decided to contest the matter in court.

Reasons for denying naturalisation baseless, court rules

Now, in a decision revealed in late March, the cantonal court of Jura ruled in the expat’s favour. The court argued that the man had met all the legal requirements needed to apply for citizenship, had no record with the police and was working in the area. Therefore, the town assembly could not throw out his application due to a lack of integration.

In regard to mowing the lawn during holidays and other complaints, Judge Boris Schepard wrote that "these grievances are based solely on the statements of citizens who have no objective evidence to support them.” With the decision, the man is now allowed to continue with his citizenship application. Whether he wishes to do so after his ordeal, however, remains to be seen.