Yesterday, the Constitutional Court rejected amendments to the law on foreigners, after the President of the Republic sent the bill “as a matter of urgency” for preventive review.

In the request sent by Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa to the Constitutional Court, the President of the Republic asked for preventive review of the constitutionality of the rules on the right to family reunification and the conditions for its exercise, on the deadline for the assessment of applications by the Agency for Integration, Migration and Asylum (AIMA) and the right of appeal.

The new Foreigners Law violates the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, announced the Constitutional Court (TC).

“The Constitutional Court has decided to rule on the unconstitutionality” of five provisions, revealed the reporting judge Joana Fernandes Costa, in a statement at the Ratton Palace in Lisbon.

Shortly after the decision was announced, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa vetoed the document.

Thus, the official website of the Presidency of the Republic states that: “The President of the Republic has vetoed amendments to Law No. 23/2007 of July 4, which approves the legal regime for the entry, stay, departure, and removal of foreigners from the national territory.

Following today’s (yesterday’s) ruling by the Constitutional Court, which deemed five provisions of the law submitted for preventive review of constitutionality to be unconstitutional, the President of the Republic will return to the Assembly of the Republic, without promulgation, under Article 279(1) of the Constitution, the Decree of the Assembly of the Republic amending Law No. 23/2007 of July 4, which approves the legal regime governing the entry, stay, departure, and removal of foreigners from the national territory.

It should be recalled that the decree was approved on July 16 in the Assembly of the Republic, with votes in favor from the PSD, Chega, and CDS-PP, abstentions from the IL, and votes against from the PS, Livre, PCP, BE, PAN, and JPP. Now, the discussion returns to the Assembly of the Republic.

Returning to the Constitutional Court’s decision. On family reunification, the Constitutional Court considers that the new law, by not including spouses or equivalent partners, may impose the nuclear disintegration of foreign citizens holding a valid residence permit and is therefore likely to lead to the separation of family members of citizens who have been legally resident in Portugal for less than two years, which constitutes a violation of the rights enshrined in paragraphs 1 and 6 of Article 36 of the Constitution,“ emphasized Joana Fernandes Costa. The judges also rejected the two-year deadline for family reunification provided for in the new Foreigners Law.

”As for paragraph 3 of the same Article 98, the court found that the imposition of a blind two-year deadline for submitting an application for family reunification with all family members of legal age who are outside the national territory is incompatible with the constitutional protection due to the family, in particular the cohabitation of spouses or equivalent partners and that of any of them with their minor children,” explained José João Abrantes.

As for the rules on the time limit for deciding on family reunification applications, the TC considered that “adding a decision period of nine months, extendable to 18 months, to the two-year waiting period [for family reunification] is not compatible with the State’s duty to protect the family.”

“In matters of judicial protection, the use of special proceedings for the protection of rights, freedoms, and guarantees,” the Court also found that one of the rules is unconstitutional.

However, the Constitutional Court considers constitutional the rule establishing that holders of certain residence permits for teaching, investment, or cultural activities are entitled to “family reunification with family members,” even if they are not minors, as is the case with other residence permits, which the President of the Republic considered potentially discriminatory.

“It was understood that the positive differentiation of holders of residence permits granted under Articles 90, 90A, and 121A does not appear disproportionate or discriminatory with reference to Article 13(2) of the Constitution,” said the presiding judge, quoted by Rádio Renascença.

The president of Chega, André Ventura, also commented on the Constitutional Court’s rejection, saying that it was “incomprehensible” and reflected “a left-wing spirit that has taken over the institutions.”

The Chega leader reiterated that the country is “experiencing a very, very serious demographic situation,” and that it is therefore “urgent” to implement the law on foreigners.

“We hope that the government will indeed back down from its insistence on a mistake, which has now been demonstrated in court, following the request for review by the President of the Republic, which was the wrong path to take,” Pedro Delgado Alves told the same radio station.

In Correio dos Açores-Natalino Viveiros, director.

Translated to English as a community outreach program from the Portuguese Beyond Borders Institute (PBBI) and the Modern and Classical Languages and Literatures Department (MCLL) as part of Bruma Publication and ADMA (Azores-Diaspora Media Alliance) at California State University, Fresno, PBBI thanks Luso Financial for sponsoring NOVIDADES.