I am not sure if I agree with Spencer 100%:
First, I don’t think Costa mentioned during the conference (and really anywhere) the exact date of the Golden Visa would be February 16, 2023. The only reference to this blatantly retroactive end date is from a certain first draft of the proposed legislation circulated with the public for the purposes of discussion. As someone who works in law and deals with legislative stuff every day, I’d say this February 16, 2023 date is a conversation starter but the intention behind (e.g., to stop flood of application before the deadline, to apply retroactively, etc., you can read it your own way). This is a strawman date.
These are the exact words THIS AFTERNOON from COSTA HIMSELF:
"O fim dos Vistos Gold “depende da Assembleia da República” e da promulgação pelo Presidente da República, diz Costa. Não há ainda uma data prevista para entrar em vigor.
The end of the Golden Visas “depends on the Assembly of the Republic” and the enactment by the President of the Republic, says Costa. No date has yet been set for it to come into effect."
This shows clearly (at least for me) that Costa does not plan to set a date for the termination of the Golden Visa until after the Assembly and the President have approved the bill. Again, we have to wait for the draft legislation. But - importantly - doesn’t this statement also show that the February 16, 2023 is a strawman date? My hope and my uneducated guess is that the Assembly with PS majority would aim to swiftly enact the legislation but not retroactively so, meaning the people who would invest after February but prior to the enactment date (the date that the legislation becomes law, i.e., ratified) would likely be grandfathered.
Second, and I would say that constitutional litigation IS NOT EXPENSIVE. It might take time (every litigation does!) but it’s NOT EXPENSIVE, especially when there’s a class action where litigants could collectively group together and raise the issues and make it easier for each litigant to spread the costs of hiring lawyers, processing fees, and also PR wise, it’s the more the merrier. The whole point of the constitutional rights is to protect minorities who are abused by a majoritarian system, so why not group together and fight for the rights? It’s not expensive, least not expensive as your time and money that went to waste due to the failures and abuses of a retroactive and abusive legislation.
For all the above reasons, I beg to differ from what Spencer said above. No I didn’t study law in Portugal. But I am just stating facts and some common sense so that we won’t let his legislation violate our constitutional rights.
