Aguiar-Branco admits Chega project on nationality but with constitutional reservations

The President of the Assembly of the Republic decided to admit Chega's project on changes to the nationality law, although raising reservations about its constitutionality, but which he believes can be corrected during the legislative process.

This position of José Pedro Aguiar-Branco is contained in a dispatch made public today, to which the Lusa agency had access.

This order also comes after the services of the Assembly of the Republic issued a non-binding opinion regarding the Chega diploma, according to which it should not be admitted because it conflicts with the Constitution, namely by seeking to ensure the possibility of loss of nationality in certain cases.

This non-binding opinion, by the parliamentary services, even led the leader of Chega, André Ventura, last Friday, to accuse the president of the Assembly of the Republic of “blocking” the political action of his party, despite the fact that at the time when Ventura made these statements José Pedro Aguiar-Branco had not yet decided anything on this matter.

In his ruling on the Chega diploma proposing changes to the nationality law, the President of the Assembly of the Republic concludes by admitting it “with due reservations regarding the issues of constitutionality raised and subject to the need for correction during the legislative process”.

The Rules of Procedure of the Assembly of the Republic, in its article 120, establishes that projects and proposed laws or proposed amendments that “violate the Constitution or the principles enshrined therein” are not admitted.

José Pedro Aguiar-Branco considers that this regulation “plays an essential role in protecting the constitutional order, functioning as a preliminary control mechanism that appears essential to ensure that any bill or proposed law or amendment submitted to the Assembly of the Republic is in compliance with the fundamental principles that emanate from the Constitution”.

“However, we understand that this power must be exercised in exceptional situations and treated with particular caution, in strict observance of the principle of legislative initiative enshrined in paragraph 1 of article 167 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic”, highlights the former social-democratic minister.

For the President of the Assembly of the Republic, the right to reject a certain diploma, “is not a power to automatically reject any and all proposals that contain some non-conformity with the Constitution, but rather the exercise of a power-duty aimed at preventing manifest violations of its precepts”.

Thus, from José Pedro Aguiar-Branco's perspective, the rejection of a diploma “should be directed only at proposals that present a flagrant, irremediable and incurable violation of the Constitution, that is, those whose foundations cannot be corrected or remedied during the legislative process – a process that is sufficiently dynamic and flexible to allow the correction of flaws and the adaptation of norms to constitutional requirements”.

“In short, we understand that the power-duty of rejection conferred on the President of the Assembly of the Republic, provided for in article 120 of the Rules of Procedure, should only occur when the proposal is blatantly inconsistent with the Constitution and so flagrant that it prevents any reasonable adjustment during the legislative process”, he claims in his ruling.

And it is from this perspective, according to José Pedro Aguiar-Branco, that the admissibility of the project presented by Chega was analyzed.

In his ruling, the President of the Assembly of the Republic presents a different conception compared to his socialist predecessors, especially Ferro Rodrigues, regarding the possible recourse to the opinion of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs.

“Contrary to what happened in previous legislatures (namely in the XIV Legislature), we chose not to resort to the opinion of the Constitutional Affairs Committee, as an advisory body for scrutiny of constitutionality for the purposes of admitting the initiative”, points out Aguiar-Branco.

For the current president of parliament, not resorting to the Constitutional Affairs Committee is the option that “best safeguards the independence of the legislative process”.

“We further consider that, ultimately, preliminary control of constitutionality, in these circumstances, could become a political instrument likely to be used to obstruct or facilitate legislative proposals in accordance with the interests of parliamentary majorities, thus compromising the exercise of the power of legislative initiative”, he argues.