“Understanding the legitimate concerns regarding immigration, I consider it a complete mistake not to have a significant political distinction concerning Portuguese-speaking citizens,” he stated.
In statements to Lusa, the president of IDL — Instituto Amaro da Costa — remarked that “a country like Portugal, not favorably distinguishing the CPLP [Community of Portuguese Language Countries], is a country that forgets its past and neglects its future, as Portuguese-speaking citizens are the only ones capable of effectively promoting lusophony.”
“This issue cannot escape criticism of the Government, which, in an attempt to follow concerns of Chega, treats equally what cannot be treated equally,” he argued, considering this situation “inconceivable and inadmissible.”
The former Christian Democrat leader also called it “a grave political mistake that the Portuguese Government did not express concern about advancing any changes to the nationality law regarding Portuguese-speaking citizens without prior consultations with the representatives of these states.”
Monteiro recalled that “there are treaties of reciprocity that enshrine this distinction” and pointed out that politically, it is “a management with feet” by the Portuguese Government.
For the former CDS-PP leader, it was unnecessary to alter the law concerning the granting of nationality.
The IDL president argued that if changes to the Nationality Law and the rules for the entry of immigrants take effect, “it can represent a setback in defending lusophony,” which he considers crucial for Portugal’s global projection.
“Portugal has a past; we do not honor the past when we do not treat those who speak our language differently in the present. And we cannot, nor is it, from my point of view, admissible for truly patriotic right that honors its history, to think that a Portuguese-speaking citizen should receive the same treatment as a non-Portuguese-speaking citizen,” he insisted.
Manuel Monteiro also mentioned the “importance of young lusophones, especially those seeking or having sought Portuguese universities for their academic studies,” and drew attention to “CPLP young students” who “seek to come to Portugal to study and wait and despair for their entry visa to be granted.”
“It is something that distresses me, that worries me, not to see the country in the 21st century seeking to enhance the dynamism of lusophony relations. Beautiful speeches are pointless if, in matters of entry, residence, and granting of nationality, we treat these citizens basically the same as others,” he indicated.
Manuel Monteiro declared that this is “a state matter and a projection of Portugal in the world” and said that “when a ruler forgoes this state vision, he is as populist as those he criticizes as populists.”
“If we make legal changes that hinder the presence of Portuguese-speaking citizens in our country, we give away the chance for these citizens, particularly the new generations, to seek destinations other than Portuguese destinations. And this, to me, seems profoundly worrying, even in terms of the survival of the Portuguese nation itself,” he warned.
