Grosspösna (Germany) municipal court case: voting rights for oak trees

Summary

In 2025, a citizen of Grosspösna, Germany, on behalf of local oak trees (Quercus robur), filed a petition with municipal authorities requesting the right for oak trees aged 18 years and older to vote in the 2025 German federal election. The filing asserted that oaks are integral members of the German community – both culturally and ecologically – and should be granted political representation to safeguard their survival in the face of environmental degradation.

Jurisprudential Framing
The petition argued that nonhuman entities are part of the national community and can hold and exercise civic rights. It drew on domestic and international law, including Article 116 of the German Basic Law, § 12 and § 14 of the Federal Election Act, and the Constitution of the Free State of Saxony. The petitioners claim that all oak trees having reached the age of 18 years are entitled to vote because they are “Germans” according to law, and §12 of the Federal Election Act and Article 116 of the Basic Law do not explicitly exclude nonhuman Germans from voting. The submission also cited the Aarhus Convention, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as the pacta sunt servanda principle under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to argue that the State’s obligations toward biodiversity protection extend to political representation.

§12 Right to vote: All Germans within the meaning of Article 116 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law are entitled to vote on election day having reached the age of eighteen

§14 Exercise of the right to vote: A German entitled to vote who does not know how to read or is prevented from casting their vote due to a disability may enlist the help of another person.

Art. 116 German Basic Law: A German within the meaning of this Basic Law is, unless otherwise provided by law, anyone who has German nationality or who has been accepted as a refugee or displaced person of German ethnicity or as his spouse or descendant in the territory of the German Reich as of December 31, 1937.

The citizenship status of the trees was based on it’s cultural and symbolic identity, pointing to the oak’s presence on the municipal coat of arms and the fact that Quercus robur is known as the “German oak.” The claim also referred to International law and Saxon state law, including the Aarhus Convention, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the European Convention on Human Rights, to argue that the State’s obligations toward biodiversity protection extend to political representation, as well as the Constitution of the Free State of Saxony’s environmental protection and historical accountability clauses (Articles 10 and 117) that recognizes the destruction of nature committed by the German Democratic Republic.

Background and Context
This unusual legal action stems from escalating environmental concerns related to the devastating impact of brown coal (lignite) mining and burning in Eastern Germany. The activity has caused significant air and water pollution, biodiversity loss, soil erosion, and severe forest degradation – particularly affecting oak trees. Mining has lowered groundwater levels, making water less accessible to trees. Combined with climate change, this has led to the critical decline of oaks. A 2024 forest condition report found that 80% of oaks in Saxony were severely damaged, with an average defoliation rate of 45%, and described their overall vitality as “highly alarming.”

Legal Proceedings
The petition requested either (1) voting rights for all mature oak trees within Grosspösna or, (2) immediate and effective state measures to mitigate climate change, halt biodiversity loss, and restore forest health. On 22 February 2025, the municipality rejected the petition, stating that only human “persons” with German citizenship may vote, thereby excluding trees on both grounds. Petitioners responded that Article 116 refers to “anyone” with German nationality – an inclusive term not explicitly limited to humans – and that failure to consider nature’s participation violates constitutional and treaty obligations.

On 22 April 2025 (International Mother Earth Day), the petitioners filed a formal complaint to the German Bundestag (the national parliament of Germany) arguing that the municipality’s refusal breached the Saxon Constitution’s environmental protection clauses (Articles 10 and 117) and international law. They cited the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties “pacta sunt servanda principle” to argue that national laws cannot override treaty obligations. Therefore, the municipality of Grosspösna cannot invoke national law as justification for not complying with the Biodiversity Convention. The case was subsequently referred to the Bundestag’s Election Review Committee under Article 41 of the Basic Law, where it remains under review.

Impact Statement

The Grosspösna oak trees case drew attention for its symbolic and legal creativity, using the formal structure of law to challenge anthropocentric boundaries. Though unconventional, it exemplifies growing experimentation in eco-jurisprudence and democratic pluralism, testing the conceptual limits of citizenship, legal personhood, and representation. While unlikely to succeed on procedural grounds, the case advances discourse on the moral legitimacy of nonhuman participation in governance and provokes legal and philosophical reflection on nonhuman agency and state accountability for ecological collapse.