The unification of the Campobasso cases with the Mantua case in the Italian Constitutional Court broadens the legal scope of the discussion on Italian citizenship by descent and reinforces the structural analysis of the contested norm.
The assessment comes from the lawyer. Maria Stella La Malfa, one of the defense lawyers in the Mantova case.
"The merging of Campobasso's and Mantova's decisions can be viewed positively, as it allows for a broader analysis of the matter and helps to clarify important points related to the topic," said the lawyer.
On Wednesday (8), the agency in Rome formally notified the measure. The Court's decision consolidates, in a single proceeding, questions that had been addressed separately, but which share central fundamentals.
Legal convergence and increased density
The cases of Campobasso and Mantova stem from the same issue. Both question article 3-bis of Law 91/1992, included by Law 74/2025, especially regarding the time limit imposed on citizenship applications.
With the unification, the Court will analyze not only the practical application of the rule, but also its structural compatibility with constitutional principles.
According to La Malfa, this movement increases the density of the trial.
“This integration fosters a more complete and in-depth view, enabling greater coherence and consistency in addressing the issues involved,” he explained to [the source]. Italianism, this Thursday (9).
In practice, this means that the Court will have before it a more robust set of arguments, stemming from different judicial decisions, but converging in their criticism of the same rule.
Difference in scope and impact of unification
Before unification, there was a clear distinction between the processes.
The case of Turin, separated and judged on March 11The ruling, which has not yet been published, deals with more specific aspects, focusing on retroactivity and the effects on European ties.
Mantova, on the other hand, has always had a broader scope, including questions about the constitutionality of the decree in its entirety, including from a formal standpoint, such as the urgency of the measure.
Now, the incorporation of Campobasso's case reinforces this more comprehensive character.
This is because the lower courts raised multiple grounds, including potential violation of acquired rights, unequal treatment, and impact on European citizenship.
With this, the judgment ceases to be merely technical and takes on a systemic scope.
Relationship between March and June audiences
The unification also reorganizes the reading of the Court's calendar.
On March 11, 2026, the Torino case was analyzed. Then, on June 9th, the Mantova hearing will take place, now with Campobasso integrated.
Although formally independent, the trials are connected.
The decision from March, which must be published by May 10thThis can serve as an interpretative reference for the June trial, although it does not exhaust all points.
This is because the June process brings together a greater number of constitutional parameters.
In this scenario, the lawyers arrive at the June hearing already with an indication of the Court's initial position on part of the matter.
What is at stake
The discussion involves Tajani Decree, which became law, that limited the recognition of Italian citizenship by descent based on a time criterion.
The central question is whether the rule can affect people who were born with the right to citizenship but have not yet obtained formal recognition.
The processes also raise questions about equality, proportionality, and the effects on European Union citizenship.
With unification, all these elements are analyzed together.
The Court's final decision will be published in Official Gazette of the Italian Republic, possibly before the judicial recess in August, and will have binding effect on the legal system.
FOLLOW-US
