The issue is that the answer to the question is unknowable until we see the text of the bill and whether or not it’s signed into law. People keep using LLMs to try to predict the future, and the answers are about as helpful as asking a magic eight ball.
1 Like
Don’t think we’ve seen the full text of the Socialist - or anybody’s - proposals from yesterday, just news reports? But if the reports are accurate, I can’t get the Socialist’s proposed math to work for GVs either… it will probably get shot-down anyway.
The PS’ proposed “nine years instead of 10 for citizens from outside the CPLP” is also just theatrics. One year is nothing in the glacial pace of the IRN.
1 Like
Pure speculation but it may be some sort of gradual / linear proposal that interpolates the difference between 5 and 9 years from June 30 2026 to 31 December 2028, while preserving the start of the count from time of application. So say the new “steady state” (applicable from Dec 2028) is 9 years and for the sake of example they are batching the calculation of this interpolation into 6 month increments. Someone applying in October 2026 would have to wait an extra (9-5)*1/5 = 0.8 years (~10 months) (since there are a total of 5 x 6-month periods from 30 June 2026 to 31 December 2028 and an October application would fall in the first of these 6-month periods). Someone in Feb 2027 would have to wait an extra (9-5)*2/5 = 1.6 years (~19 months) and so on and so forth.
Between us, doubt the PS (or any of those politicians) have the numerical acumen to think it through like this but this is what I suspect they are getting at (pure speculation though on my part).
From this morning…
Nationality Law shaken by threats of rejection from Chega and PS.
If nothing changes before Wednesday’s discussion, the Nationality Law risks remaining as it currently stands. With the deadline for submitting amendment proposals now passed, both Chega and PS have already made it clear that they will not support the corrections presented by the parties supporting the Government. This final dramatisation indicates that negotiations will have to continue until the plenary session on April 1st, leaving it to be seen who will concede in this equation.
4 Likes
Another from the Expresso, full version, translated.
Expresso LdN 30 março 2026.pdf (697.6 KB)
The new president is right in saying that the controversy and lack of agreement over the nationality law is symptomatic of a deeper problem of political polarisation.
In this case making consensus unlikely in the Parliamentary debate on the clauses of the law that were challenged by the Constitutional Court.
1 Like
Would it be possible to share the WhatsApp link with me, please?
I’m still pessimistic about the whole situation. I think Chega’s opposition is largely performative; they’ll vote for it in the end as they will not miss an opportunity to f■■■ over as many immigrants as possible, even if it’s slightly less than they’d hoped.
5 Likes
Yes, although they will weigh that against the political value of maintaining a hard-line position and being able to portray the other parties as soft on immigration
4 Likes
Any idea how reliable that outlet is? They seem to be reporting that the government has dropped the change of time counting starting from issuance of the residence permit:
As for the timeframes for obtaining citizenship, they continue to be calculated from the date the application is filed, rather than from the date of the residence permits, as the government had initially intended.
1 Like
Having seen the PSD proposal, I don’t think that reporting is correct
1 Like
From what i saw, the proposal of the government only covers thechange of costitutionally problematic matters, (cancellation of citizenship and application of law to pending applications). Other contraversial matters are mostly covered in PS’s proposal. Since they will be voted in the same session, I think they are still negotiating. Chega’s proposal does not seem to be prepared for negotiation.
1 Like
The transition period for the ones who has right but not applied is written as 31st June in PS proposal. Is it a common thing to write a date which is not on the calendar, or is it just a mistake?
3 Likes
The latest proposals about transition period are as below:
Proposal of the goverment:
1 – Administrative procedures pending on the date of entry into force of this law are governed by Law No. 37/81, of October 3, in its wording prior to this law.
2 – The granting of requests for concession or acquisition provided for in the preceding paragraph depends on the fulfillment, on the date of their submission, of the requirements of Law No. 37/81, of October 3, in its wording prior to this law.
3 – Deleted (The provisions of the preceding paragraph are of an interpretative nature.)
Proposal of PS:
1 – This law takes effect from the date of its entry into force, without prejudice to the provisions of the following paragraphs.
2 – Administrative procedures pending on the date of entry into force of this law shall be governed by Law No. 37/81, of October 3, in its wording prior to this law.
3 – The previous wording of Law No. 37/81, of October 3, shall also apply to persons who meet the requirements for the attribution and acquisition of nationality provided for therein on the date of entry into force of this law and who initiate the respective procedure by June 31, 2026, however, the new wording of subparagraph h) of paragraph 1 of article 6 shall apply.
4 – The residency periods in national territory for the purposes of the naturalization procedures provided for in paragraph 1 of article 6 of Law No. 37/81, of October 3, are temporarily as follows:
a) 6 years for persons who would complete the 5-year period in 2026 as provided for in the previous wording of subparagraph b) of paragraph 1 of article 6;
b) 7 years for persons who would complete the 5-year period in 2027 as provided for in the previous wording of subparagraph b) of paragraph 1 of article 6;
c) 8 years for persons who would complete the 5-year period in 2028 as provided for in the previous wording of subparagraph b) of paragraph 1 of article 6.
1 Like
I personally like the proposal from JPP! 
Artigo 7.º
Aplicação no tempo
1 - […].
2 - […].
3 - Aos cidadãos estrangeiros que, à data da entrada em vigor da presente lei, já
residam legalmente em território nacional, continua a aplicar-se, para efeitos de
aquisição da nacionalidade portuguesa por naturalização, o prazo de residência
legal de cinco anos previsto na redação anterior da Lei n.º 37/81, de 3 de outubro.
4 - O disposto no número anterior aplica-se igualmente aos procedimentos
administrativos pendentes à data da entrada em vigor da presente lei.”
4 Likes
There seems to be inconsistency in Govt. proposal as their previous (vetoed) version only had 3 paragraphs, of which both ##2-3 were found unconstitutional by TC (as in D.7). Now they somehow listed 4 paragraphs keeping 1 and 2 the same and ‘deleting’ 3 and 4 (non-existent). I hope they meant to actually delete 2 and 3, because if they don’t then #2 remains unconstitutional.
Despite it is contrary to what constitutional court had commented, they are insisting on one controversial subject, whether the requirement should be met on the application or decision time. It may become important for the ones who had placed early applications.
1 Like
Well, maybe, but it’s not clear as they messed up the numbers..
If they indeed want to insist, this should go to TC again and vetoed.
1 Like
It is really difficult to track multiple version, but I feel the Govt. intends to strike down both paragraphs found inconstitutional by TC in Article 7.
I have just checked the TC ruling and indeed it has 4 paragraphs.
Additionally, BE’s own proposal contains the same 4 paragraphs, and they also propose to strike out ##3-4 (same as Govt.).
So “early application” still remains as our option of last resort for now 
«
Artigo 7.º
Aplicação no tempo
1 – A presente lei produz efeitos a partir da data da sua entrada em vigor, semprejuízo do disposto nos números seguintes.
2 – Aos procedimentos administrativos pendentes à data da entrada em vigor dapresente lei aplica-se a Lei n.º 37/81, de 3 de outubro, na redação anterior àpresente lei.
3 – O deferimento dos pedidos de atribuição ou aquisição previstos no númeroanterior depende do preenchimento, à data da sua apresentação, dos requisitos daLei n.º 37/81, de 3 de outubro, na redação anterior à presente lei.
4 – O disposto no número anterior tem natureza interpretativa.»
1 Like
Curious where/how you find this? If true, I’d be okay with it as a person who reaches 5 years in 2026 (only 1 additional year of residency required).
1 Like
I think it’s me. I applied in December 2019. I was caught in the whole COVID cancelation/reschedyle/re-cancel/re-schedule mess. I had a biometrics appointment in 2022. I’ve completed my 5 years since initial application and payment. I’ve served my time. And I honestly want to move to Portugal. To integrate. And maybe some day to live somewhere else in Europe. I’ve lived in Europe off and on over the past 20 years.
I have not passed my language test because I just keep putting it off and life has gotten I the way.
I’m working my butt off to try and pass and get an application in before everything changes,
1 Like