A consortium of nine Portuguese law firms has filed a formal complaint with Portugal’s Ombudsman on behalf of 1,260 Golden Visa investors, arguing that Portugal’s revised nationality law and long immigration processing delays have left investors without transitional protection.
Nationality law changes
Portugal’s revised nationality law, Lei Orgânica n.º 1/2026, was approved by Parliament on April 1, 2026, signed by President António José Seguro on May 3, 2026, and entered into force on May 19, 2026 after publication in the Diário da República.
The law changed Portugal’s citizenship timeline in two major ways:
- The standard naturalization period increased from five years to ten years for most foreign nationals.
- Citizens of EU member states and Community of Portuguese Language Countries now face a seven-year requirement.
- Residency time now starts only from the date a residence permit is officially issued.
- The previous rule allowing time to count from the date a temporary residence application was submitted to AIMA has been removed.
The transitional protection is limited. Nationality applications submitted to the Institute of Registries and Notaries on or before May 18, 2026 continue under the previous five-year regime. Investors who had not yet reached the nationality application stage by that date are not protected.
Why Golden Visa investors are challenging the change
Golden Visa applications are legally required to be decided within 90 days, but many investors have waited three to five years for residence permits, with some applications dating back to 2021.
The complaint argues that this delay created a sequencing problem. Investors could not file nationality applications without valid residence permits. Because AIMA had not issued their permits in time, they missed the May 18 cutoff and lost access to the old five-year citizenship framework.
The law firms’ position is that investors who made qualifying investments, paid fees, and complied with program rules should not lose years of residency credit because the state failed to meet its own processing deadlines. They argue that if AIMA had processed applications within the required 90-day period, many of the 1,260 investors would have qualified under the previous rules.
Role of the Ombudsman
Portugal’s Ombudsman, the Provedor de Justiça, is an independent constitutional body that can review complaints involving public administration. It can investigate government agencies, request documents, and conduct unannounced inspections.
The Ombudsman cannot overturn legislation or issue binding court decisions. However, it can refer legal questions to the Constitutional Court for review of a legal norm’s legality or constitutionality.
That referral power is central to the complaint. The same consortium filed an amicus curiae brief with Portugal’s Constitutional Court in December 2025, and a collective lawsuit against the Portuguese state is also underway.
Government response and pending guidance
Portugal’s government has not indicated that it plans to reverse course. Minister of the Presidency António Leitão Amaro has argued that investment migration consultants misled clients into expecting fast citizenship, a claim the consortium rejects.
André Miranda, managing partner of Fieldfisher Portugal, pointed instead to the government’s own processing commitments, asking what happened to the minister’s promise that all investors would have residence cards by 2026.
The government has 90 days from May 18, 2026 to publish updated implementing regulations for the nationality law. As of the article’s publication, neither AIMA nor the IRN had issued procedural guidance on how pending cases would be handled.
What it means for Portugal’s Golden Visa
The complaint does not challenge Portugal’s Golden Visa program itself. The residency-by-investment route remains open and operational.
The dispute concerns the citizenship-law overhaul, the removal of prior residency-credit rules, and the impact of government processing delays on investors who applied under the earlier legal framework.
The key unresolved question is whether residency time already accrued under the old framework will count toward the new citizenship timeline. The statute does not answer that question, and formal guidance has not yet been published.
If domestic legal remedies fail, the consortium has indicated it may take the case to the European Court of Human Rights. Further legal actions are expected in the coming months.
Source article: outboundinvestment.com
