Nomad Gate Community

What happens if the Constitutional Court rejects the Nationality Law?

Residencies & citizenships Portugal Golden Visa
, , ,
1

The legislative process to amend the Nationality Law has not yet been completed. The proposal was approved in Parliament’s plenary session, in a final and global vote. Following this approval, the President of the Republic must decide whether to promulgate the law, veto the law, or request a preventive constitutional review from the Constitutional Court.

The Socialist Party (PS) parliamentary group has requested a preventive review of the parliamentary decree amending the Nationality Law. The President must wait for the Constitutional Court’s decision. The Court has 25 days to issue its ruling, which is expected on 15 December 2025.

The Socialist Party (PS) identifies eight potentially unconstitutional provisions across the two nationality decrees, mainly citing violations of the principles of equality, proportionality, and legitimate expectations. One of the objections concerns the absence of any transitional provision in the decree approved by Parliament, which states that the new Nationality Law “enters into force on the day following its publication.”

According to the PS, the changes undermine the protection of legitimate expectations, particularly due to:

  • the alteration of the rules governing the calculation of legal residence periods,
  • the lack of any transitional regime, and
  • the repeal of provisions safeguarding access to nationality for stateless individuals and minors.

As a result, three key points arise that are of particular relevance for golden visa applicants:

  1. The absence of a transition period;
  2. The lack of a grandfathering clause for pending applications;
  3. The need to protect applicants who relied in good faith on Portugal’s legal framework, regulations, and program.

If the Constitutional Court finds no constitutional violations in the submitted provisions:

  • The legislative process resumes from where it was suspended.
  • The President can no longer use a preventive constitutional veto on the same grounds, arguing unconstitutional reasons but can do it based on political reasons.
  • So, the President then has 20 days to decide between:
    1. Promulgating the law; or
    2. Exercising a political veto (based on political, not constitutional, reasons).
  • If a political veto is issued, the law returns to Parliament, which can override it with an absolute majority of all sitting members. In that case, the President has 8 days to promulgate the law after receiving it back.

If the Constitutional Court declares some provisions unconstitutional:

  • The provisions deemed unconstitutional cannot enter into force.
  • The law returns to Parliament, which can remove or modify the affected provisions, or, in specific cases, confirm them with a two-thirds majority of deputies present, provided this majority exceeds the absolute majority of all sitting members.
  • After this revision, the law returns to the President, who may promulgate it or exercise a political veto.
  • If the law is amended to correct or reformulate the provisions deemed unconstitutional, the President may request a new preventive constitutional review.

Practical Summary

  • If the law is declared constitutional by the Court:
    • The President cannot request a new preventive review.
    • Can promulgate or issue a political veto.
    • If promulgated, the law enters into force the day after publication in the Official Gazette.
    • If vetoed, Parliament can override with an absolute majority, requiring the President to promulgate within 8 days of receipt.
  • If parts of the law are unconstitutional:
    • Parliament must amend the law or, in specific cases, confirm the provisions by qualified majority.
    • The President may, after the revision, promulgate or veto politically.
    • If the law is amended to correct or reformulate the provisions deemed unconstitutional, the President may request a new preventive constitutional review.

The Nationality Law process still depends on the Constitutional Court’s ruling and the subsequent decisions of the President of the Republic. This process ensures that the law respects constitutional limits while leaving room for political decision-making if necessary.

If you have additional questions on this topic, feel free to post them below or reach out directly.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://nomadgate.com/portugal/legal-questions/if-constitutional-court-rejects-nationality-law
11 Likes
2

What about if the violations of Article 288 are found by the TC?

My understanding is that if the violations are against an “entrenched clause (Article 288)”, the 2/3 confirmation is legally, invalid and politically impossible. Is that correct?

3 Likes
4

Obrigado Dra. Torres, this lays things out nicely.

5

yes, it is correct

3 Likes
6

Thank you for this detailed summary.

I’d read somewhere that constitution referral is only for specific parts of the law (in this case, the eight provisions), and that there wouldn’t be an opinion on other parts. Does that afford the President to request a new preventative review for those other parts?

7

yes! Only if they change the draft the same law can be analysed again by the Court as per the request of the President

1 Like
8

Bit more on “Constitutional revisions” (but not Article 288 violations?) in this article…

Constitutional revision, that is, the process of amending the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, is the exclusive competence of the Assembly of the Republic. For it to proceed, it needs to be approved by a two-thirds majority of the deputies in office, as stipulated in the Constitution itself. Since Parliament is composed of 230 deputies, this majority corresponds to 154 votes. With the Government (PSD/CDS-PP) holding 91 deputies, an agreement with the right-wing parties—the 60 deputies from Chega and the nine from Iniciativa Liberal—would be enough to gather the necessary majority to approve a constitutional revision. In other words, a constitutional revision is possible even without the support of the Socialist Party.

The only exception occurs in the case of an extraordinary revision, that is, one carried out before five years have elapsed since the last revision. In that situation, an even stronger majority would be required, of four-fifths of the deputies (provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 284 of the Constitution), which corresponds to 184 votes — a scenario in which the Socialist Party (PS) would be indispensable. However, this condition does not apply at present, since more than five years have passed since the last constitutional revision, concluded in 2005.

9

Thank you Ms Margarida for your explanations. What are the possible grandfathering clauses that may appear in the law ? I would be eligible to apply for citizenship at the end of the month, but missing the A2 level certificate. Any chance the law comes into effect in another six months or so ? :slight_smile:

1 Like
10

The government currently possesses a 2/3 majority. If they choose to override the constitutional court’s veto, how likely is it that the President will issue the “political” veto after that?

11

Like many GV applicant I moved to Portugal upon preliminary approval to await the final processing of my golden visa application which was supposed to be reviewed and either accepted or rejected within 4-6 months. I waited for more than 4 years in limbo, unable to travel, and without access to the Portuguese health care system. I was finally informed by my attorney at the end of November of this year that my visa application was approved. With the date starting the clock for the required period of residency revised to not count the 4 years I have already lived in Portugal; and the 5 or 10 year period for applying for nationality up in the air, I am unwilling to proceed with paying the DUC until these issues are resolved. In your opinion, would I be on firm legal ground to wait until resolution to make the decision as to whether to proceed, or to inform AIMA that I wish to withdraw my application? As someone who is already 78 years old, either starting the clock only after receipt of the first residency card or a 10 year waiting period before application for nationality are a complete betrayal of trust, and I should not be required to decide whether or not to proceed until these issues are resolved.

7 Likes
12

The attorney responsible for your case is always the most appropriate person to provide you with precise guidance regarding your rights and the best strategy to follow. However, it is important to recognize that you had legitimate expectations regarding the timelines and conditions of the procedure, and these were clearly frustrated both by the delays and by the legislative changes currently under discussion. Should the law move forward as presently proposed, those expectations could, in principle, be raised and examined before a court.

In any case, the scheduling of your biometric data appointment probably takes place only next year, so you will have time to reflect and wait for greater clarity before making a final decision on whether to proceed with your application.

Please note that the DUC is only paid at the moment of the in-person appointment and not beforehand. Therefore, at this time, you have no immediate obligation to make any payment.

13

Constitutional amendments are approved by a two-thirds majority of the Deputies in effective. The President of the Republic cannot veto or refuse to promulgate the constitutional revision law. However, this is a very rare situation.

14

Thank you for your response. My application has been ongoing since 2021 and I already had my biometric appointment in January of 2023. THe acceptance from AIMA and the DUC was sent for payment in late November 2025.

I am not planning on making the payment until the date initiating the timeclock and the time of residence for naturalization are settled. This could take quite a few more months. You have both more experience in this area and more direct contact with AIMA than the attorney who originally filed my visa application. In your experience, is there any indication if applicants such as myself can wait until these issues are definitely decided, or is it more likely that my application will be cancelled for non-payment? Or is this something we cannot know until AIMA acts?

Thank you so much for all of your efforts on our behalf,

Maxine Borcherding

15

Maxine, I think you would need to decide based on your appetite for parting with ±€6k of your hard earned cash for something you may or may not be using long term (i.e. your residence card). Versus the risk of losing the process altogether as if you do not pay in 6 months AIMA may legally cancel your process. The more practical problem would be how to force AIMA to re-issue the DUC if you decline to pay the initial one on time (I believe it has one week validity or such like).
If you still live in PT, you may just take the card and see how the citizenship saga plays out later. Having the card in hand would give you some comfort I suppose for the day-to-day purposes in PT.

16

Thanks for your response, Tommy. I have already relocated away from Portugal. At my age, I simply do not have unlimited time to wait and see how many new ways the Portuguese government will find to change the rules to our detriment.

If the Constitutional Court rules the proposed changes unconstitutional and Parliament doesn’t respond with a constitutional amendment to have their way, I would consider returning to Portugal. If not, I am done trusting my life and future to a country that will not keep its word.

8 Likes
17

Usually the payment has a deadline to be paid. If you do not pay they can be cancel but never had a case like this before.

18

@Margarida.Torres what is your opinion of the latest TC ruling? How would this impact those whose first card has till pending?

1 Like
19

The President of the Republic will now return the law to Parliament, where amendments may lead to more balanced and constitutionally sound solutions. Let´s see if they will make an exception for the golden visa holders due to the legal expectation they have from the laws in force in the moment of their investment. The law was not approved yet and therefore some good changes can happen until the law will be published

2 Likes
20

Thanks Margarida. In your view, is there anything ARI applicants/holders can do over the next few weeks to encourage a more favourable outcome?

2 Likes