The President of the Republic, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, spoke on Sunday about the doubts raised by “various entities” concerning the foreign law and its submission to the Constitutional Court, which occurred on Thursday.
“The documents are there [sent to the Constitutional Court], included in my explanation, and correspond to the doubts raised by various entities; thus, it’s good to have legal certainty,” he told journalists in Marvão, Portalegre district.
“The Constitutional Court is better at prevention than cure. It will assess whether it is justified or not, defining legal certainty,” he continued.
“In our system, what happens otherwise is that any court can raise this doubt at any time, and then it rises to the Constitutional Court, by which time it is much later, and with possible divergences, the court rules,” he further detailed.
Regarding the nationality law, the head of state noted: “I have not yet read the nationality law; it will likely be voted on in September, and therefore, I will follow the same procedure, which is after it’s voted and arrives at Belém, I naturally examine if there is any issue of unconstitutionality or any political issue, and if so, I act. If not, I will promulgate it.”
Journalists on the scene also questioned the head of state about closed health services, but he said he would not comment on this matter, “much less about specific cases that characterize this summer period.”
“Whether July, which is ending, or the previous month, June: I am following what is happening, but I do not comment,” he assured.
Foreign Law (and the controversy)
The foreign law was approved in Parliament on the 16th, with votes from the PSD, Chega, and CDS, alongside many criticisms for the lack of mandatory opinions and the government’s rush.
Amendments to the legal regime of entry, stay, exit, and removal of foreigners from the national territory had already been approved in the Constitutional Affairs Committee on the 11th, with votes against from the Left, who alleged legal breaches due to the absence of mandatory opinions.
This time, in plenary, IL opted for abstention, with MP Rui Rocha justifying the change of position because the legislative process was “absolutely inadmissible on the part of the social democratic party,” with “legislative proposals at the 25th hour.”
Ten days passed, and the topic continues to be ‘in sight,’ with political parties divided and also pronouncing on Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa’s decision to send the law to the Constitutional Court.
The Left considers the President of the Republic’s decision as the “wisest.” Meanwhile, the Right argues the law is urgent and reiterates that it adheres to the Constitution’s articles.
Carolina Pereira Soares | 09:21 – 25/07/2025
The topic was also criticized by the Bar Association, which indicates that three different articles of the Portuguese Constitution could be violated: 4th (Portuguese citizenship), 13th (principle of equality), 18th (legal force).
Speaking about the situation, the Bar Association issued an “unfavorable” opinion on the government’s proposed changes, pointing out — and explaining — the “well-founded doubts about the constitutionality” of the bill.
The Bar Association asserts that three different articles of the Portuguese Constitution could be violated: 4th (Portuguese citizenship), 13th (principle of equality), 18th (legal force).
Carolina Pereira Soares | 14:58 – 23/07/2025
Despite Marcelo’s submission, the parties’ criticism, and the Bar Association’s “unfavorable” opinion, the Prime Minister is confident that the Constitutional Court will validate the changes to the foreign law.
“I am convinced that despite all this media pressure that seems to want to induce the court itself to want to decide in a certain direction, […] the Constitutional Court will provide a constitutional conformity judgment to what was approved in the Assembly of the Republic,” said Luís Montenegro today, considering the submission of the bill to court a “perfectly normal procedure.”
And on Saturday, he further mentioned: “If that [validation of constitutionality by the Constitutional Court] does not happen, the world will not end, Portugal will not end, and our momentum to regulate immigration will not end either,” he emphasized, reaffirming his conviction “that it will not even happen.”
[Updated at 20:16]
