The Tajani Decree, which altered the requirements for acquiring Italian citizenship by descent, has left many applicants uncertain about whether to continue pursuing their cases. Two high‑profile court rulings are still pending, and a growing number of individuals are challenging the new rules by invoking the regulations that were in place before the decree.
Pending decisions
- Constitutional Court – Expected to rule on the constitutionality of the new rules introduced by the Tajani Decree. The outcome could confirm, modify, or overturn those rules.
- Supreme Court – Will address the specific issue of citizenship for minors under the new framework.
Both decisions are considered crucial because they will shape the final form of the revised citizenship regulations.
Distinction between “new rules” and “old rules”
- New rules – Apply to applicants who submit their paperwork after the decree’s implementation. The pending Constitutional Court decision will determine whether these rules stand as written.
- Old rules – Remain relevant for applicants who began the citizenship process before the decree took effect. These individuals argue that they should be judged under the previous regulations because the decree’s changes occurred without a grace period and prevented them from completing their applications through no fault of their own.
Legal strategy for pre‑decree applicants
- Demonstrate prior preparation – Show that the applicant had gathered all required documents and was ready to file before the decree’s cutoff date.
- Prove inability to access consular services – Provide evidence that appointments were unavailable or that the applicant was placed on a waiting list, preventing timely submission.
- Reference a “paper trail” – Submit records of ongoing work on the citizenship file that predate the decree, establishing good‑faith effort.
- Invoke the 1948 precedent – Cite earlier cases where applicants were allowed to proceed under the old rules when procedural obstacles arose.
Current outcomes
- A noticeable number of cases presented in Italian civil courts have been decided in favor of applicants who meet the above criteria.
- These positive rulings recognize that the inability to file before the deadline was not due to the applicant’s negligence but to the sudden regulatory change.
- The success of these cases appears independent of the forthcoming Constitutional and Supreme Court decisions, which focus solely on the new rules.
Practical considerations for prospective applicants
- Assess timing – If the citizenship process was initiated before the decree’s implementation, gathering documentation that proves readiness can be a decisive factor.
- Monitor court rulings – The Constitutional Court and Supreme Court decisions will affect future applicants but may not retroactively alter the status of cases already filed under the old regime.
- Seek legal counsel – Navigating the distinction between the two rule sets and presenting a robust paper trail often requires specialized legal assistance.
- Prepare for delays – Even with favorable precedents, civil‑court proceedings can be lengthy; applicants should plan for extended timelines.
In summary, while the ultimate shape of Italy’s citizenship law hinges on pending high‑court rulings, a separate legal avenue remains viable for those whose applications were already underway before the Tajani Decree. Demonstrating prior preparation and the lack of fault in missing consular appointments continues to be the cornerstone of successful challenges under the old rules.
