One risk is that you submit an application that is not valid, and the law changes in a way in the future that makes you valid but your second application is rejected because you have a pending application already. And a year or two later your original application is rejected, and you are stuck without any avenue to file a valid application or you waste several years in limbo.
2 Likes
In short, no, absent some stretched reading of the TC decision. Some lawyers are saying to do this because they are making huge fees and don’t care that your application will get rejected 2 years from now.
2 Likes
Hmmm …. this could be one to get several legal opinions on before deciding.
1 Like
Having said that, it should be fairly straightforward to establish whether there have been many successful citizenship applications where all criteria were not met at the time of submission, but were indeed met by the time of the decision. Also to establish whether a first application that turns out to be invalid could not simply be cancelled and then followed up by a second, later, valid application that is eventually approved. Immigration lawyers must have a variety of past experience they can go by.
2 Likes
Another way to look at it is, the only way to have any option of avoiding a 10 year process is to make sure you submit under the current favourable regime, even if all the current criteria are not yet met, knowing that they will eventually be met. If this is rejected and the 10 year regime comes into effect, well then you will have a long wait anyway and plenty of time for your first application to be rejected and be no longer ‘pending’.
So one strategy might be to prepare your citizenship application under the current regime, ready to submit as soon as the outline of a new regime is clear, but make sure you submit before the new regime takes effect if it is an unfavourable regime, eg 10 years, no transition/grandfathering etc. Seems as though in that scenario there’s not much to lose by submitting under the current regime, especially if you’re say only a few months away from the 5 year mark.
1 Like
I would not suggest submitting an application before it is valid and complete - unless it is an absolute last resort and if the final bill (whatever it is) is so unfriendly to ARI holders.
That’s what I’m saying and what my lawyer said. I think there is too much risk, such as you are banned from applying in the future due to fraudulent application.
Apparently there’s something like a 30-day initial check where they check your basic eligibility, so if you submit several months before the 5 year mark you wouldn’t clear the first hurdle.
1 Like
António Leitão Amaro, Minister of the Presidency, spoke this Wednesday about the Constitutional Court’s rejection of the Nationality Law . The minister explained that the executive branch does not share the same understanding regarding the declaration of unconstitutionality of four provisions and added that it will be a matter of time before the law is approved and that, with the “essential” aspects validated, the Government will now have to “work” on the “contested” parts. “I believe that the same thing that happened to the immigration law will happen to the Nationality Law: it will happen,” he asserted.
2 Likes
What a jerk
10 Likes
More details here
Nationality Law. Leitão Amaro says the Constitutional Court “validated the course” of the Government.
The Minister of the Presidency assures that the Constitutional Court (TC) “validated the course” of the Government when it ruled this week on the Nationality Law and vetoed several provisions of the legislation on the subject.
If he wants to engage in a year-long tussle with the Assembly, the President and the TC, that’s absolutely fine with me
6 Likes
That is what missing in my arsenal. I have to urgently start on A2 and I am not in Portugal. No now exploring my options on how best to start A2. Any suggestions?
He’s the ones heading the Ministry of Truth, right?
4 Likes
I can really recommend these guys (though they’re not cheap)! I received my A2 certificate from them after completing a fast-track course over a 4 month period back in the summer. My other family members are taking the long route via a private bespoke class 2 hours per week. Due to busy and changeable work/study schedules they could not fit into any of the regular scheduled courses so they should complete in summer 2026 after about 18 months of study. My son also could not keep up with the regular course due to uni schedules so he had a bespoke intensive course where he completed A1 this past summer and will do the next part (A2) in summer 2026, i.e. intensive study during the university summer holidays.
So as a family we’ve had experience of 3 different teachers all of whom were really very lovely, and the admin are very responsive and very helpful and willing to tailor something to your specific needs. They send your A2 certificate directly to your lawyer once you have completed the 150 hours.
6 Likes
From an email sent by our lawyers:
“Kindly note that the provisions concerning the extension of residence periods - from 5 to 10 years - were not subject to preventive constitutional review by the Constitutional Court and may therefore enter into force upon promulgation. The two decrees must now be vetoed on grounds of unconstitutionality by the President of the Republic. Should the President veto only the unconstitutional provisions, the remaining amendments to the Decree will take effect following partial promulgation and publication.”
I think that Amaro (in addition to his offensive, tiresome statements) is expressing hope that the president will veto only the unconstitutional provisions, and promulgate the rest. When he says “the essence of the law is validated,” he’s arguing the these portions should, in his view, be promulgated.
We would of course prefer for the president to veto the whole mess and start over. This process is so complicated to keep track of, but it sounds like the President has more options than a simple veto, despite the ruling of unconstitutionality.
3 Likes
21 posts were merged into an existing topic: Early Applications for Citizenship
Wait what? I thought the president either vetos the whole law or none of it… I didn’t know he code veto parts of it, and the rest becomes law… we are screwed if that is the case, why would he veto the parts that are not deemed unconstitutional???
He would veto it because he can, and based on his statements to the media, I get the impression that he opposes the whole thing, along with the polarized approach to its passage.
1 Like
what did they say would be the benefit? like legally