(1948) Pre- and Post-reform same family and judge: opposite outcomes in Bologna
Same ancestor, same court, same judge: different outcomes
I just wanted to share a recent outcome involving my family’s Italian citizenship cases (3rd and 4th generations), as it may be relevant to others following the impact of the 2025 reform.
Our family had two separate 1948 cases based on the same Italian ancestor, the same line of descent, and essentially the same documentary evidence. Both cases were decided by the same judge in the Tribunal of Bologna.
The key difference was:
One group filed before March 27, 2025.
The other group filed after March 27, 2025.
The first group obtained recognition of Italian citizenship.
The second group was denied recognition.
The court did not question the family relationship, the Italian ancestor, or the underlying citizenship claim. Instead, the judgment relied almost entirely on Article 3-bis and Constitutional Court decision No. 63/2026. The judge treated that decision as the controlling framework and applied the new law in full.
The family had already begun pursuing citizenship before the reform. Since 2024, family members had initiated court proceedings to obtain and correct civil records needed for citizenship recognition. These actions were presented as evidence of a concrete and ongoing effort to pursue citizenship before the law changed.
The court, however, considered those actions to be only a “mere expectation” and not a legally protected position.
The judgment also rejected arguments related to administrative barriers. Interestingly, this was a 1948 case, where consular recognition is not available and judicial recognition is the appropriate route. As a result, evidence commonly used in other citizenship cases (such as attempts to obtain Prenot@mi appointments) was considered irrelevant. The court stated that the issue was no longer access to administrative procedures but rather the application of the new substantive requirements introduced by Article 3-bis.
In short, the outcome was based entirely on the filing date and the court’s interpretation of Constitutional Court decision No. 63/2026.
“La Corte costituzionale, nel rigettare le censure proposte, ha escluso la dedotta arbitrarietà della
distinzione tra chi ha presentato domanda entro il 27 marzo 2025 e chi successivamente, la violazione
del principio di tutela dei diritti quesiti e la configurabilità di una revoca retroattiva dello status
civitatis, rilevando, invece, che la norma introduce una preclusione originaria all’acquisto della
cittadinanza, e non una perdita della stessa.”
“In difetto di tali presupposti, trova, pertanto, applicazione la regola generale dettata dalla norma, secondo cui i soggetti nati all’estero, in possesso di altra cittadinanza, sono considerati come non aver mai acquistato la cittadinanza italiana.”