— Updated at 10:57 am —
“The right to citizenship by jus sanguinis is a perfect, imprescriptible subjective right that does not depend on administrative discretion. The procedure serves only to recognize a right that already exists,” stated the lawyer. Corrado Caruso during the hearing.
He criticized the state's defense position, according to which descendants would only have a legal expectation of initiating an administrative procedure. "This interpretation improperly equates the recognition of citizenship with the naturalization process, in contrast to the consolidated jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court itself," he argued.
— Updated at 10:52 am —
"The right to citizenship by jus sanguinis, which arises with parentage, cannot be transformed into a mere expectation conditioned on the timing of a protocol or the availability of an appointment," argued the lawyer. Monica Lis Restanio.
According to her, treating recognition in this way "annihilates the very essence of status civitatis and ignores its constitutional protection."
According to her, for decades, the administration created artificial obstacles that distorted this principle. Children considered non-direct heirs were subjected to waits of more than ten years just to get an appointment and begin the recognition procedure. Inoperative scheduling systems, endless waiting lists, and ever-increasing costs ended up excluding people who were entitled to a legitimate right until the very last minute.
— Updated at 10:19 am —
After a suspension of 1 hour and 6 minutes (they left at 10:05 and returned) 11:11 PM.(from Rome), the hearing resumes. The panel of the Constitutional Court decided not to accept the intervention presented by Marco Mellone.
— Updated at 9:49 am —
The hearing is suspended while the Constitutional Court panel deliberates, in closed session, on the admissibility of the request submitted by Marco Mellone.
The lawyer requested permission to intervene in the proceedings, arguing that the discussion also involves one of his clients in the Campobasso case, a court that challenged the current Italian citizenship law. According to Melloni, the issue is recent and there was no time to formalize the participation within the procedural deadline.
According to sources close to the process, the move promoted by Marco Melloni, who asked to intervene in the hearing this Wednesday (11), is part of a previously articulated legal strategy.
Over the past two weeks, the legal team has worked to try to steer the matter through a procedural route that avoids a solution of an essentially political nature. The concern was to prevent the case from being resolved by applying the principle of “Melius re perpensa”which could pave the way for a change in legal orientation.
In this scenario, according to the report, the Constitutional Court would be inclined to declare the legitimacy issue raised by the Turinio court inadmissible, while simultaneously recognizing the position defended by the government.
Given this situation, the strategy adopted had a clear procedural objective: to try to obtain at least a hearing for the Turin case with the proceedings underway in Mantua. This maneuver would allow them to gain time while awaiting the eventual publication of new judicial decisions.
The calculation also targets a specific date on the Italian legal calendar: the hearing scheduled for April 14 before the Sezioni Unite da Corte de Cassaçãowhich will examine the issue of children born before their parents became naturalized.
Behind the scenes, the interpretation is straightforward: it's a procedural strategy to preserve legal interpretations that, according to those involved, the political establishment seems willing to ignore.
— Updated at 9:25 am —
The hearing was suspended for a few minutes while the Court panel deliberates, in a closed session, on the admissibility of the request submitted by Marco Mellone.
The lawyer requested authorization to intervene in the proceedings, arguing that the matter under discussion also affects one of his clients involved in a case pending in Campobasso, another court that recently challenged the current Italian citizenship law. According to Melloni, this is a recently arising issue, which would have prevented him from formally requesting his participation within the established procedural timeframe.
“I take the liberty of asking the president and this most excellent Court to declare the intervention admissible, because it is timely, because my clients are holders of this subjective legal status and, in fact, are substantial parties to this constitutional process. Therefore, they should be placed on the same level as the appellants today, and this defense on the same level as the defense acting today,” says Marco Mellone.
Updated at 8:58 am
The hearing began with the reading of all the petitions by Giovanni Pitruzzella, rapporteur for the judgment of the Tajani Decree on citizenship.
Next, they should speak. (not in this order):
Avv. Alfonso CELOTTO
Avv. Diego CORAPI
Avv. Monica Lis RESTANIO
Avv. Giovanni CARIDI
Avv. Riccardo DE SIMONE
Avv. Benedetta BALLATORE
Avv. Giovanni Bonato
Corrado Caruso Avenue
Avv. Stato: Ilia MASSARELLI
Avv. Stato: Lorenzo D'ASCIA
Updated at 8:51 am
The Constitutional Court of Italy will hold a hearing on Wednesday, March 11, regarding the new rules for Italian citizenship.
The session will be streamed live online. The public can follow it on Italianismo.
FOLLOW-US
Luciano
March 11, 2026 at 09:36 pm
Ola