Campobasso postpones citizenship ruling: legal context and points to watch

The Court of Campobasso has postponed a decision on a request for recognition of Italian citizenship to April 27, 2027, awaiting any ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on a question raised within the case, according to a report by Insieme.

Court of Campobasso decision — postponement and reasons

According to the cited piece, an ordinance dated September 15, 2026, ordered the suspension of the proceedings until a potential European ruling on a matter considered relevant to the case. The report notes that the court deemed it necessary to await European interpretation in order to assess the scope of the applicable national rule.

Mandatory factual note: the legal controversy surrounding the Tajani Decree (D.L. 36/2025, converted into Law 74/2025) is not limited to the procedural application of the decree to ongoing cases. The sensitive issue being debated in the courts is the material retroactivity of the rule — i.e., whether the new law can retrospectively erase a jure sanguinis citizenship right born with the person. This distinction is central and must be explicitly mentioned whenever referring questions to constitutional or European authorities.

What the 2025 reform actually changed (points that must be cited)

• Via consular: starting with D.L. 36/2025, the consular route for recognition has been restricted. In practical terms, it is no longer possible to obtain consular recognition for great-grandchildren and later generations; the consular path is limited to children and grandchildren, under the new framework.
• Administrative route in the municipality: the possibility of administrative/extrajudicial recognition in the municipality has been substantially restricted in most cases. In other words, the municipality has effectively ceased to be the normal path for recognizing jure sanguinis citizenship for foreign applicants in many situations.
• Material retroactivity: the decree includes provisions affecting substantive rights by declaring retroactive limits on the attribution of citizenship for those born abroad who are not children or grandchildren of an Italian citizen. This issue — whether a new law can take away a right that a person has had since birth — is precisely the controversial point prompting constitutional challenges and legal questions.
• Protection of prior proceedings: provisions of D.L. 36/2025 / Law 74/2025 provide protections for proceedings filed before the decree took effect. It is essential to distinguish between applicants who started the process before the law took effect (who may be protected by transitional rules) and those who filed applications after the law came into force.

Relevance for Brazilians and descendants — delays and practical impact

The suspension in Campobasso illustrates that tensions between national law, Italian constitutional law, and European Union law can cause suspensions and delays in judicial proceedings. Practical points to watch:

• Not all cases will be affected in the same way: cases filed before the entry into force of D.L. 36/2025 deserve special attention, as the decree itself contains transitional/protection rules.
• Referrals to the ECJ, when they occur, typically focus on interpreting EU law; the outcome can influence the interpretation of national norms, but does not automatically eliminate all local uncertainties — it will depend on the European ruling's content and how Italian courts apply that interpretation.

What to watch and practical recommendations

• Check the Campobasso Court ordinance directly whenever possible to confirm dates, the judge’s name, and details of the suspension (the Insieme report is a reference, but the judicial decision is the primary source).
• Monitor releases from the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ), the Italian Constitutional Court, and the Italian courts handling the case.
• Keep in mind the provisions of D.L. 36/2025 / Law 74/2025: the consular route is restricted to great-grandchildren and later generations; the administrative route in the municipality has been substantially limited; and there are protections for processes initiated before the decree’s effective date.

Conclusion

The postponement ordered by the Campobasso Court draws attention to the current legal complexity: this is not only about procedural questions but about a dispute over the retroactive effects of the 2025 reform on jure sanguinis rights. The hearing set for April 27, 2027, as reported, is tied to the course of constitutional and European debates—and any coverage should clearly note that the controversy includes the issue of material retroactivity and the existence of legal protections for proceedings commenced before the decree came into force.

Source: Insieme