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.