Portuguese Citizenship Law: 4 of 7 provisions reviewed found unconstitutional

On December 15, 2025, the Portuguese Constitutional Court issued a ruling reviewing the constitutionality of several provisions the government intends to introduce into the Citizenship Law.

Of the seven provisions submitted for review, the court found four unconstitutional.

As a result, the draft law must be returned to Parliament for review and a new vote. Several aspects should be considered when considering further review and decision-making:

Parliamentary sessions will resume on January 7.

After the revised version is drafted and approved by Parliament (which may depend on an agreement between the minority government and the opposition), the text must be sent back to the President of the Republic for review or veto.

Presidential elections are scheduled for January 18. Current polls suggest a second round in February.

These events are extremely important, as they require a review and amendment of the legislative proposal. While the matter is not closed and may be considered for several weeks or months, the decision provides important guidance, particularly for applicants currently in the process of obtaining a residence permit.

Nevertheless, and according to a preliminary analysis of this decision, for clients whose residence permit procedures are ongoing, the following key points were addressed:

The rule that states: "...for the purposes of calculating the periods of lawful residence provided for in this Act, the time elapsed since the application for a temporary residence permit, subject to its granting, shall also be taken into account" will be repealed.

This means that, under the new approach, the qualifying period for citizenship will be calculated from the date the residence permit is granted, not from the date it is requested.

Rationale: The Court noted that this calculation of waiting times was introduced in the context of significant delays and to mitigate the impact of these delays on applicants. In the Court's view, as delays are being reduced, foreign nationals should not assume that this rule will remain in effect indefinitely.

Lack of a minimum transitional regime: The Court did not deem it necessary to introduce a period protecting applicants with pending residence permit procedures who are not yet able to apply for citizenship because they do not meet all the legal requirements.

The Court also emphasized the need to balance legitimate expectations with public interest considerations supporting legislative changes.

Rationale: The Court considered that the article establishing that current legislation applies to administrative procedures pending on the date of entry into force of the new Citizenship Law operates as a rule preventing retrospective effect and, in practice, serves a transitional purpose.

Unconstitutional: Sections 3 and 4 of Article 7 of the proposed amendment, which provide the following: "3 - Granting the right to obtain or acquire [citizenship] provided for in the preceding paragraph is conditional on fulfilling, on the date of their submission, the requirements of Law No. 37/81 of 3 October, in its version preceding this Law. 4 — The provision of the preceding paragraph is interpretative in nature," were found to violate the principle of protection of legitimate expectations inherent in the rule of law, as they impose excessive sacrifices on foreign nationals.

Rationale: The Court found that the legislature had failed to provide sufficient justification for this interpretation, and that the wording of sections 3 and 4 of Article 7 would effectively give the new law retrospective effect to pending citizenship cases, since its current wording would establish that the relevant moment for the application of the law and its requirements would be the filing of the citizenship application, rather than the decision taken in the proceedings. In the Court's view, this would be detrimental to pending citizenship cases, contradicting the regime deriving from Article 15(4), since the granting of a residence permit could occur even after the filing of the citizenship application.

While the court's position may raise concerns among applicants pursuing the case, we emphasize that the legislative process is still ongoing, and it is inappropriate to draw definitive conclusions at this time, especially given that current practice and interpretation of the Citizenship Law and the Civil Registry Law appear to have been overlooked, as are ongoing residence permit cases.

What are the next steps? A revised text of the citizenship law must be prepared, approved (taking into account parliamentary dynamics and agreements between the government and the opposition), and resubmitted to the President of the Republic for consideration. It is important to note that the final wording of the revised text may also not be adopted and sent for further review.

Currently, the legal framework remains unchanged, and current residence permit programs continue without any changes.

NATLAN will continue to closely monitor the proceedings before the Constitutional Court and provide timely practical updates, helping all applicants move forward with clarity and confidence in Portugal's long-term legal and investment framework.

If you are planning to obtain a residence permit, invest in a country's economy, or purchase foreign real estate, we invite you to a consultation with our firm. During a personal online meeting, we will thoroughly examine your questions and develop a step-by-step action plan for you.