The applicants, Afghan nationals, were granted admission declarations by the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) within the framework of resettling particularly vulnerable Afghans, under the list procedure (human rights list and bridging list). These lists were drafted on the basis of individual reports of threats and proposals from organisations and individuals according to the criteria of a so-called profile grid. This grid referred to individuals who, in recent years, had distinguished themselves through their commitment to western values, including freedom of expression, democracy, human rights (especially women's rights), cultural identity, and freedom of science, art, and the press, and who have cooperated with German ministries, authorities, or organisations, who advocated for German interests, or whose work was financed by German resources. The first list, with a cut-off date of 31 August 2021, included those who had been exposed to immediate danger due to the Taliban's rise to power because of the abovementioned activities. The bridging program (bridging list) was created to cover the period between the end of inclusion in the human rights list and the official start of the federal admission program, aiming to admit particularly vulnerable Afghans who could only be identified after the cut-off date. The applicants belong to this group of people included in the bridging list.

The applicants were granted declarations of admission on 19 January 2024 by email from the German Society for International Cooperation. By decision of 8 December 2025, the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) announced that the declarations of admission pursuant to Section 22 Sentence 2 of the Residence Act were invalid and expired for all persons listed on the so-called human rights list/bridging program and who had not yet entered Germany. Consequently, the applicants were notified by email on 12 December 2025 that their declarations of admission had expired. This decision was used as the basis for the rejection notices issued by the German Embassy in Islamabad on 11 December 2025 in respect of their visa applications.

The applicants lodged an appeal against the rejection of the visa application and requested interim injunction. The Regional Administrative Court of Berlin noted that the declarations of admission were communicated via email of 29 January 2024 and affirmed that they constituted a suitable basis for the formation and exercise of legitimate expectations in the present case. Also, the issuance of the declarations of admission in favour of the applicants was based on an individual risk assessment, and the BMI list appended to the email of 19 January 2024 indicated that the first applicant had the status of a "representative of non-governmental organisations and civil society, for whom an association with Germany" results in a "risk category".

The Berlin Regional Administrative Court allowed the request for an interim injunction and ruled that, despite its generally internal administrative nature, the decision to revoke a previously issued and publicly communicated declaration of admission pursuant to Section 22 Sentence 2 of the Residence Act is subject to judicial review for objective arbitrariness. Specifically, the court clarified that the issuance of a declaration of admission, in light of the principles of the rule of law and the protection of legitimate expectations, pursuant to Article 2 (2) Sentence 2 in conjunction with Article 20 (3) of the Basic Law, and the constitutional guarantee of effective legal protection, pursuant to Article 19 (4) of the Basic Law, allows the possibility of judicial review for arbitrariness with regard to the justification and comprehensibility of the governmental authority's actions.

The court considered that this applies to the present case concerning the issuance of the admission declarations which were based on an individual risk assessment within the framework of the list procedures for the admission of particularly vulnerable Afghans. According to the court's reasoning, the Federal Government should have communicated with a "minimum degree of transparency regarding the reasons" for the cessation of the political interests mentioned in Section 22, Sentence 2 of the Residence Act. A failure to provide such justification validated the admission declarations and an entitlement to a visa arose. The court reviewed national case law to state that such a declaration of admission has a decisive effect, at least when it has been communicated to them as in the present case, because once issued, it confers upon the beneficiaries a legal position based on which they can enjoy the protection of legitimate expectations under the rule of law and the protection of legitimate expectations. The court further asserted that the BMI's decision of 8 December 2025 did not meet the constitutional requirement to provide individual and non-arbitrary justifications for such decisions. Therefore, such a decision was not capable of effectively invalidating the admission declarations issued in favour of the applicants in this case.

The court ordered the Federal Ministry of the Interior, by interim injunction, to issue the visas for all applicants as they met the requirements for visa issuance. The court clarified that the declaration of acceptance pursuant to Section 22 Sentence 2 of the Residence Act existed in their favour, was valid and could not be overturned by the BMI decision of 8 December 2025, which was used as justification for the rejection notices issued by the German Embassy in Islamabad on 11 December 2025.

As for the general requirements for the issuance of visas, the court noted that there were no security concerns, that security interviews took place and did not reveal any obstacles and that the financial requirement was waived since the scope of the admission was exclusively based on humanitarian grounds.