In May 2025, Italy enacted Law 74/2025, a reform of citizenship law that significantly changed how Italian citizenship by descent (iure sanguinis) is recognised for individuals born abroad. The core principle introduced by the reform (via a new Article 3-bis of Law 91/1992) is that children born outside Italy do not automatically acquire Italian citizenship at birth just because one parent is Italian, unless specific conditions are met. On 28 May 2025, the Ministry of the Interior issued Circular no. 26185 to provide guidance on applying these new rules, ensuring consistent implementation by consulates and municipal offices. This page focuses on one key aspect of that guidance: Article 3-bis, paragraph 1, letter (c) of Law 91/1992 (as amended) – the rule concerning “exclusively” Italian ascendants and how it affects cases where a parent in the lineage renounced Italian citizenship before their child’s birth.
The reform of Italian citizenship introduced by Law 74/2025 (conversion of Decree-Law 36/2025) marks the most comprehensive restructuring of nationality law in over three decades. Its central objective is to redefine the principles of the right of citizenship by descent, by limiting its indefinite extension to distant generations while preserving legitimate claims within a close, demonstrable family link to Italy.
This commentary examines the legal implications of the reform and the Circular, focusing on several crucial areas: the treatment of cases where citizenship transmission has been interrupted by the voluntary loss or renunciation of Italian nationality; the evidentiary requirements for proving an exclusive Italian parent or grandparent; the transitional provisions safeguarding applications filed before 27 March 2025; and the new mechanisms for citizenship reacquisition and acquisition per “beneficio di legge” (by statutory entitlement) created by the 2025 reform.
It provides a comprehensive overview of how Italian authorities are now interpreting continuity of lineage, which documents are required, and under what circumstances an applicant may still be eligible for recognition iure sanguinis despite an interrupted chain.
If you are planning to register the birth of your children born abroad or were considering obtaining an Italian passport and citizenship but are unsure how to proceed, feel free to contact me — I am here to help you navigate the process.
A Paradigm Shift: The End of Automatic Citizenship for Those Born Abroad
For more than a century, the Italian principle of ius sanguinis operated with almost unqualified continuity: “the child of an Italian citizen is Italian from birth.” Citizenship followed bloodline alone, with no limitation in generations and regardless of where the person was born or whether they possessed another nationality. This system allowed millions of descendants of Italian emigrants—many now several generations removed from Italy—to claim citizenship automatically through documentary proof of ancestry.
Law 74/2025 has fundamentally overturned that model. By introducing the new Article 3-bis into Law 91/1992, the legislator has replaced the presumption of acquisition with a presumption of non-acquisition. Paragraph 1 expressly provides that “any person born abroad, even before the entry into force of this Article, who possesses another citizenship, shall be deemed never to have acquired Italian citizenship.” The effect is immediate and profound: those born outside Italy who already hold another nationality are no longer presumed to be Italian by birth. Instead, their recognition as Italian citizens becomes an exception rather than the rule, permissible only when one of the narrowly defined circumstances under letters (a) to (d) of Article 3-bis applies.
The reform therefore reverses the logic and the burden of proof. It is no longer sufficient to show descent from an Italian ancestor; applicants must now demonstrate that their lineage fulfils one of the legally prescribed exceptions that preserve a tangible connection to Italy—such as an uninterrupted transmission of citizenship, the existence of an exclusive Italian parent or grandparent, or documented residence of an ascendant in Italy prior to the applicant’s birth. In practice, this means that the ius sanguinis principle has shifted from being an automatic hereditary entitlement to a qualified right contingent upon continuity, proximity, and evidence of belonging.
This paradigm change signals a new era for Italian nationality law: from an open-ended recognition of bloodline towards a system centred on the effective and recent link with the Italian State and its citizenry.
Transitional Safeguards: Protection for Applications Lodged Before 27 March 2025
Recognising the profound impact of the reform, the legislator and the Ministry of the Interior introduced a transitional mechanism to protect applicants who had already initiated the citizenship recognition process under the previous legal framework. This safeguard, enshrined in letters (a) and (a-bis) of the new Article 3-bis, ensures that those who acted before the reform’s critical date—27 March 2025—are not penalised by the new restrictive rules.
The Circular of 28 May 2025 explicitly confirms that individuals who either formally filed a citizenship application or had secured and received confirmation of an appointment with the competent Italian authority (a municipality in Italy or a consulate abroad) by 27 March 2025 at 23:59 (Rome time), will continue to be assessed under the pre-reform regime. In these cases, the traditional approach—governed for more than three decades by the well-known Circular K.28.1 of 8 April 1991—remains applicable. That earlier circular had codified the practical procedures and evidentiary standards for iure sanguinis recognition, requiring applicants to prove uninterrupted descent from an Italian citizen ancestor through official civil status documents, but without any limitation in generations or proximity.
In practical terms, this means that municipal and consular authorities must finalise these pre-cut-off applications using the old rules, without applying the new generational restrictions or the presumption of non-acquisition introduced by Article 3-bis. The Circular leaves no room for discretion: once the appointment was duly booked or the petition filed before the cut-off, the case must proceed as if the reform had not yet entered into force.
The same protection extends to minor children whose birth certificates had already been submitted for transcription by an Italian parent before the same date. In these circumstances, the transmission of citizenship is considered to have been lawfully initiated under the previous system, and recognition will continue accordingly.
From a broader perspective, this transitional clause serves a crucial function of legal certainty and administrative fairness. It prevents the retroactive application of new limits to thousands of families who had relied on the earlier legal position and who had already invested time, resources, and expectations in the recognition process. For many applicants—particularly those under the jurisdiction of consulates known for substantial backlogs such as London, New York, Buenos Aires, São Paulo, and Toronto—this provision effectively preserves their acquired procedural rights.
It also reflects a policy of continuity and respect for legitimate expectations: the Italian State acknowledges that individuals who initiated recognition before the reform had acted in good faith under the rules then in force. The transitional safeguard therefore operates not as a concession, but as a principle of legal protection, ensuring that the change in law does not retrospectively deprive those applicants of the benefit of the former ius sanguinis framework.
The “Exclusive Italian Citizenship” Clause: Article 3-bis(1)(c)
Among the innovations introduced by Law 74/2025, none has attracted as much professional attention as the new “exclusive Italian citizenship” clause, set out in letter (c) of Article 3-bis(1) of Law 91/1992. This provision represents both a safeguard for legitimate descendants of Italian citizens and a decisive restriction on the unqualified extension of ius sanguinis to distant generations. It reads as follows:
“Where a parent (including an adoptive parent) or a grandparent possesses — or possessed at the time of death — exclusively Italian citizenship, the presumption of non-acquisition shall not apply.”
The Circular of 28 May 2025 clarifies its meaning and scope with precision:
“If, at the date of the applicant’s birth, a parent or grandparent held exclusively Italian citizenship, the exception under letter (c) applies; if the ascendant died before that birth, one must verify that at the date of death he or she was exclusively Italian.”
In substantive terms, this clause operates as a corrective mechanism within the newly restrictive framework. It preserves the possibility of citizenship recognition for descendants who can demonstrate a recent and authentic link to Italy through an ascendant who never acquired another nationality. Yet it also imposes a two-generation ceiling: only a parent or grandparent may serve as the qualifying exclusive Italian citizen; no more remote ancestor can be relied upon.
The rationale is to reaffirm the concept of effettività del vincolo — the effective, living connection with Italy. A citizen who maintained sole allegiance to the Italian Republic throughout their life embodies such a connection. Conversely, where generations have progressively detached from Italian civic identity through naturalisation abroad or renunciation, the law now presumes that the bond has dissolved.
The Evidentiary Burden
The practical application of this clause rests entirely on documentary proof. Applicants must demonstrate, beyond reasonable doubt, that their parent or grandparent possessed exclusively Italian citizenship at the relevant moment — either the date of the applicant’s birth, or, if the ascendant was already deceased, the date of the ascendant’s death.
The Circular imposes a stringent evidentiary standard on municipalities and consular offices. Civil-status officers are required to conduct thorough checks, requesting:
– Negative certificates of naturalisation issued by the foreign State of residence, confirming that the ascendant never became a citizen of that country; – Attestations of non-renunciation of Italian nationality, where applicable; – Certificates of non-registration on foreign electoral rolls, which often serve as indirect evidence that no other citizenship was held; and – Any additional public records capable of proving the absence of foreign nationality.
All foreign documents must be duly translated and legalised, and simple declarations or family statements are not accepted. The Ministry explicitly reiterates that self-certifications or affidavits “cannot replace objective documentation”, thereby upholding the rigorous approach already established under Circular K.28.1/1991.
This evidentiary discipline reflects the overall spirit of the 2025 reform: citizenship is no longer a claim founded merely on ancestry but a legal status that must be objectively and verifiably demonstrated. For practitioners, this heightens the need for comprehensive genealogical and administrative research, often across multiple jurisdictions.
Continuity of Transmission
Perhaps the most delicate clarification in the Circular is that the exception under letter (c) does not supersede the requirement of an unbroken line of citizenship. The Ministry states unambiguously that the condition “shall operate only where the line of transmission of Italian citizenship has remained intact.” In other words, the clause does not revive citizenship that was already lost within the family line.
The principle may be illustrated as follows. Suppose an Italian-born woman voluntarily acquired British nationality in the 1960s and, under the law in force at that time, lost her Italian citizenship. If her daughter was born after that loss, the daughter was not born to an Italian citizen parent and therefore never acquired Italian citizenship by descent, notwithstanding that the maternal grandparents were born and died as Italian citizens exclusively. The presence of an “exclusive” grandparent cannot mend a severed chain of transmission.
This interpretation has been confirmed not only by the Ministry but also by authoritative professional commentaries. As a matter of fact, the presence of an Italian grandparent, even one who never naturalised, does not suffice if the parent through whom descent passes had already lost or renounced citizenship before the child’s birth. The continuity of status civitatis remains essential.
Accordingly, the clause functions as a protective exception, not a restorative one. It can preserve citizenship where the legal chain remains intact but cannot reconstruct it once broken. This interpretation aligns with the long-standing constitutional and international law principle that citizenship cannot skip a generation.
In practice, the “exclusive Italian citizenship” clause demands a dual demonstration: proof of exclusive nationality and proof of continuity. Together, they form the core test for post-reform iure sanguinis recognition. It is a demanding standard, but one designed to ensure that Italian citizenship reflects both legal lineage and genuine allegiance—a fusion of heritage and identity consistent with the modern conception of belonging to the Republic.
Practical implications for interrupted lineages
The Ministry’s Circular devotes particular attention to what is, in practice, the most complex issue raised by the 2025 reform: how the new Article 3-bis interacts with family lines in which Italian citizenship was lost before the next generation was born. This is where the reform’s conceptual precision meets its human impact, and where the distinction between genealogical descent and juridical transmission becomes decisive.
The Circular reaffirms a fundamental tenet of Italian nationality law: only a citizen can transmit citizenship. Descent by blood alone, however authentic in genealogical terms, is legally irrelevant if the parent was not a citizen of the Italian Republic at the time of the child’s birth. This principle has long underpinned the status civitatis in Italy, and the 2025 reform merely strengthens it, closing interpretative gaps that had occasionally allowed claimants to rely on distant ancestry as though citizenship could skip a generation.
Under the new framework, therefore, citizenship is transmitted through a chain of status, not of blood. The transmission is effective only if each ascendant in the line held Italian citizenship at the exact moment their child was born. If at any point that legal status is lost—through naturalisation, renunciation, or operation of law—the chain is irreparably broken, and no subsequent documentation can revive it.
However, Article 3-bis(1)(c) introduces a narrowly defined safeguard for cases where the line remains technically unbroken but might otherwise be excluded by the reform’s presumption of non-acquisition. Imagine, for instance, a family where the applicant’s grandparent was born and lived as an Italian citizen exclusively, never naturalising abroad; the parent was likewise still Italian at the time of the applicant’s birth, though perhaps later acquired another nationality. The applicant, born abroad and automatically holding a foreign citizenship by birth, would under the general rule of Article 3-bis be presumed never to have acquired Italian citizenship. Yet, because the parent or grandparent was an exclusive Italian citizen at the critical moment, the applicant’s case falls within the exception of letter (c), and the presumption is set aside.
This mechanism operates as a form of evidentiary rescue, protecting genuine iure sanguinis cases where the family’s connection with Italy remains close and the legal transmission intact. It allows recognition to proceed for individuals whose link to Italy is recent, demonstrable, and rooted in an ancestor whose allegiance to the Republic was undivided.
By contrast, the same provision cannot be invoked to resuscitate a broken line. Where the parent lost Italian citizenship before the child’s birth—whether by voluntary renunciation, by acquiring another nationality under pre-1992 rules, or through any act that terminated citizenship—the legal capacity to transmit it ceased. The child, being born to a non-Italian parent, never acquired citizenship at all. The existence of a grandparent who remained exclusively Italian does not alter this outcome: it confirms heritage but not status. Citizenship is not inherited retroactively; it must exist in the parent at the moment of transmission.
This distinction—between continuity that can be preserved and loss that cannot be repaired—is at the heart of the post-reform interpretation. For practitioners, it defines the boundary between eligibility and extinction of the right. Letter (c) does not create a new path to leapfrog over a generation that lost citizenship; it simply prevents unjust exclusion of those whose legal chain remains intact.
In practical application, the challenge lies in demonstrating both elements required by the law:
1. that an ascendant of the first or second degree (a parent or grandparent) was exclusively Italian at the relevant time; and
2. that the transmission of citizenship was uninterrupted from that ascendant down to the applicant.
Each element must be supported by official, verifiable evidence—civil-status records, certificates of non-naturalisation, and consistent historical documentation. The task of the lawyer or consular officer is to reconstruct this sequence meticulously, identifying any potential interruption and advising accordingly.
Ultimately, the Circular’s interpretation underscores that Italian citizenship is a status of law, not of sentiment. It honours descent only where legal continuity and exclusive nationality coincide. Where that chain has been broken, no ancestral Italian identity—however genuine or heartfelt—can restore what was legally lost. This approach reflects the reform’s underlying philosophy: to reaffirm citizenship as both a legal inheritance and a living bond with the Italian State, one that cannot survive a voluntary severance in the generations between.
Interaction with Letter (d) and Related Provisions
Alongside the “exclusive Italian citizenship” clause of letter (c), the reform introduces in letter (d) of Article 3-bis(1) a complementary pathway intended to preserve eligibility for citizenship recognition in a different, yet equally meaningful, category of cases. While letter (c) rewards genealogical proximity, rooted in the exclusive nationality of a parent or grandparent, letter (d) protects territorial proximity, focusing on a demonstrable and recent bond of residence with Italy.
Under this provision, the presumption of non-acquisition for those born abroad may be disapplied if one of the applicant’s parents or adoptive parents resided continuously in Italy for at least two years after having acquired Italian citizenship and before the birth of the child. In other words, if the parent who became Italian by naturalisation (or through any form of reacquisition) established a tangible and sustained presence in Italy prior to the child’s birth, the law recognises this as sufficient evidence of an active and effective connection with the Italian community.
The rationale is clear: citizenship should not be purely nominal or historical, but grounded in effective belonging to the Republic. A parent who has lived in Italy for a meaningful period after becoming Italian and before the child’s birth embodies this link. Their residence is treated as a concrete manifestation of civic integration and national allegiance, thus justifying transmission of citizenship to the next generation even if the child is subsequently born abroad.
The evidentiary standard required under letter (d) is strict. Applicants must produce historical residence certificates (certificati storici di residenza) issued by the relevant municipality in Italy, proving that the qualifying parent resided legally and uninterruptedly within Italian territory for at least two consecutive years after obtaining citizenship. The Circular emphasises that such residence must be both continuous and subsequent to the acquisition of citizenship: periods of stay in Italy prior to naturalisation, or residence interrupted by absence or lack of registration, do not meet the requirement. If the municipal records do not contain sufficient proof of continuous residence, the civil-status officer must request the applicant to supply additional documentation before the case can proceed.
Letter (d), therefore, introduces a territorial safeguard analogous to the genealogical safeguard of letter (c). Together, these two exceptions articulate a dual principle of proximity—one by blood and allegiance, the other by presence and participation. Both mechanisms serve a common purpose: to ensure that recognition of Italian citizenship corresponds to a real and verifiable nexus with Italy, whether that connection arises through the unbroken civic identity of one’s forebears or through the parent’s tangible reintegration into Italian society.
This interplay between genealogical and territorial proximity reflects the deeper philosophy of the 2025 reform: citizenship is no longer a passive inheritance, but a living bond that must be sustained either through the fidelity of one’s lineage or through the physical and civic presence of one’s immediate family in Italy. The law thus balances tradition with territoriality, recognising that belonging to the Republic may be affirmed both through the endurance of an unbroken Italian identity and through a renewed act of residence and participation within the national community.
Benefit-of-law acquisitions for minors by statutory entitlement – Beneficio di Legge (Article 4, new paragraphs 1-bis to 1-quater)
A further pillar of the 2025 reform is the introduction of citizenship acquisitions “by statutory entitlement” (per beneficio di legge), established through the insertion of paragraphs 1-bis, 1-ter and 1-quater into Article 4 of Law 91/1992. These provisions create a distinct route for minors, separate from iure sanguinis transmission, designed to facilitate integration for children growing up in Italy within families that already possess a genuine and proximate link to the Republic.
The reform addresses a long-standing gap in Italian nationality law. Previously, minors born or raised in Italy within families of Italian origin often faced procedural and legal ambiguities when neither iure sanguinis nor naturalisation applied directly. The new “statutory entitlement” mechanism provides a formal and predictable route for their inclusion, while still preserving the principle that citizenship must reflect an effective connection with the Italian State.
Under Article 4(1-bis), a minor whose parent is an Italian citizen by birth (that is, a citizen iure sanguinis, not one who acquired citizenship through marriage or naturalisation) may obtain Italian citizenship under one of two alternative conditions:
(a) if the parents (or the legal guardian) submit a declaration of will to obtain Italian citizenship on behalf of the child, and the child subsequently resides legally and continuously in Italy for at least two years after that declaration; or
(b) if such a declaration is made within one year of the child’s birth, or within one year from the formal establishment of the parent–child relationship (in the case of recognition, adoption or delayed filiation).
These two scenarios distinguish between families who are already resident in Italy and wish to consolidate their child’s legal status through continuous residence, and those who wish to act promptly following birth or recognition. In both situations, the crucial element is the parents’ declaration of intent: the act must be deliberate, formal, and filed before the competent civil-status authority. Once the relevant conditions are fulfilled, the child acquires citizenship from the date on which the legal requirements are met, not retroactively from birth.
The Ministry’s Circular highlights an essential interpretative limitation: only Italian citizens by birth may transmit citizenship through this procedure. Parents who obtained citizenship through marriage, naturalisation, or other derivative routes are explicitly excluded. The legislator’s intention is to preserve the “benefit of law” route for families whose connection to Italy is recent yet authentic — typically second-generation descendants of Italians who have returned to Italy and established residence there.
This mechanism therefore serves two key objectives. First, it provides a legal avenue for minors who could not otherwise acquire citizenship automatically, thereby preventing cases of irregular or uncertain status. Secondly, it reinforces social and territorial integration, recognising that sustained residence and active participation in Italian civic life are indicators of genuine belonging.
The reform also introduces a safeguard against potential abuses by imposing formal and financial requirements: every declaration of will is subject to a €250 administrative contribution to the Ministry of the Interior, payable per minor. This fee underscores the principle that the acquisition is an active legal process rather than a passive entitlement.
Finally, Article 4(1-ter) grants the child, once they reach majority, the right to renounce Italian citizenship at any time, provided they hold another nationality and such renunciation does not result in statelessness. This ensures compliance with international norms on the prevention of statelessness and the freedom of individuals to define their nationality status autonomously.
Viewed together, the new paragraphs 1-bis to 1-quater form an integrated regime that balances the State’s interest in regulating citizenship with the individual’s right to identity and inclusion. They represent a measured step towards a more modern, integration-oriented concept of nationality—one that acknowledges the realities of migration and mixed heritage while preserving the legal coherence and civic values of the Italian citizenship system.
Transitional opportunity for minors (Article 1, paragraph 1-ter, Law 74/2025)
In order to mitigate potential inequities during the initial implementation of the 2025 reform, especially within siblings born in the same family, the legislature introduced a transitional safeguard specifically designed for minors who found themselves affected by the abrupt procedural change. This measure, codified in Article 1, paragraph 1-ter of Law 74/2025, opens a temporary window of opportunity extending until 31 May 2026 for certain categories of children of Italian citizens by birth.
The provision applies to minors who had not yet reached the age of eighteen on 24 May 2025, the date on which the law entered into force, and whose parents are Italian citizens by birth pursuant to letters (a), (a-bis) or (b) of the new Article 3-bis of Law 91/1992. Within this one-year window, such minors may acquire Italian citizenship by means of a formal declaration of will (dichiarazione di volontà) presented to the competent municipal or consular authority, based with applicant’s place of residence. Should the child reach the age of majority before the expiry of the deadline, the declaration may be lodged personally by the now-adult applicant.
The transitional framework ensures that families already engaged in recognition or registration procedures at the time of the reform are not unfairly penalised by the new restrictions. It acts as a bridge between the old and the new regimes, preserving the substantive rights of those whose eligibility was not in doubt but whose applications had not yet been finalised when the reform took effect.
From a procedural standpoint, the law provides for the payment of an administrative contribution of €250 for each declaration. This sum functions primarily as a symbolic procedural fee, intended to formalise the process rather than to create a financial obstacle for applicants. The declaration must be personally submitted before the delegated civil-status officer and subsequently entered in the official citizenship register, in order to guarantee full transparency, legal authenticity, and traceability in line with the administrative instructions set out in the Ministry’s Circular.
The policy rationale behind this clause is twofold. First, it upholds the principle of continuity and legitimate expectation, recognising that individuals who had initiated citizenship processes before the reform acted in reliance on the previous legal framework. Secondly, it ensures that genuine iure sanguinis cases—particularly those involving children of confirmed Italian citizens—are not disrupted merely because of procedural timing or bureaucratic delays.
In practice, this transitional mechanism provides an essential measure of fairness. It acknowledges the administrative realities of Italian citizenship recognition, where long consular waiting lists and delayed document verification have historically prolonged procedures for families abroad. By granting a defined one-year period to regularise these positions, the legislature has balanced the integrity of the new legal framework with respect for the rights already in formation.
This approach exemplifies the broader philosophy underlying Law 74/2025: a measured reform, strict in principle but tempered by proportional safeguards, ensuring that the transition to the new citizenship regime proceeds with both legal rigour and humane consideration for those already within the system.
Reacquisition of citizenship for former Italians (Article 17-ter)
A particularly significant aspect of the 2025 reform is the reopening of a pathway for former Italian citizens to reacquire their nationality, under conditions that reflect both historical justice and administrative pragmatism. The introduction of Article 17-ter into Law 91/1992 marks a legislative acknowledgment of the complex trajectories of millions of Italians who, during the twentieth century, lost their citizenship through mechanisms that today would be regarded as inconsistent with modern principles of dual nationality and voluntary choice.
The new provision targets those who lost Italian citizenship prior to 16 August 1992, the date on which the current citizenship law entered into force and abolished the automatic forfeiture rules of the Law of 13 June 1912, No. 555. Under the 1912 regime, Italian citizenship could be involuntarily extinguished in several common scenarios: when an Italian voluntarily naturalised abroad, when a woman married a foreign national and automatically acquired her husband’s citizenship, or when a minor lost citizenship as a result of the parent’s change of nationality. These provisions, now viewed as discriminatory and outdated, caused countless Italians abroad to forfeit their legal status even though they often maintained a cultural and emotional allegiance to Italy.
Article 17-ter now provides a mechanism to correct this historical anomaly. It allows any person who:
1. Was born in Italy, or has been resident in Italy for at least two consecutive years, and
2. Lost Italian citizenship before 16 August 1992 as a result of the provisions of Law 555/1912 (not through voluntary renunciation after 1992),
to reacquire citizenship through a simple declaration of will (dichiarazione di volontà). This declaration must be made between 1 July 2025 and 31 December 2027, in person before a delegated civil-status officer (Ufficiale di Stato Civile) in Italy or before the competent Italian consular authority abroad. Once recorded in the citizenship register, the reacquisition takes effect from the date of the declaration itself.
Unlike the naturalisation process, this reacquisition procedure is entirely declarative rather than discretionary: there is no ministerial approval or evaluative assessment of merit. It restores citizenship as a matter of right, recognising that its prior loss resulted from obsolete legal provisions rather than from a genuine act of disaffiliation.
The measure holds particular importance for Italian emigrants and their direct descendants who wish to re-establish formal nationality without engaging in complex judicial or administrative proceedings. For many families of Italian origin who emigrated to the Americas, Europe, or Australia in the early to mid-twentieth century, this provision offers a straightforward opportunity to reclaim the nationality of birth or origin, thereby restoring legal continuity with their ancestral State.
However, the law draws a clear temporal and conceptual boundary: those who voluntarily renounced Italian citizenship after 1992 are excluded from this benefit. Since the enactment of Law 91/1992, the loss of citizenship has been predicated on free and conscious renunciation rather than automatic operation of law, and therefore does not raise the same equitable concerns as the pre-1992 regime.
From a policy standpoint, the reintroduction of a reacquisition window aligns with the reform’s broader philosophy: to modernise the legal concept of citizenship while maintaining an avenue of redress for historical injustices. It also symbolises Italy’s ongoing commitment to its diaspora, recognising the enduring cultural and familial ties that bind millions of individuals worldwide to the Italian nation.
For practitioners, Article 17-ter will likely give rise to a new category of administrative practice between 2025 and 2027, requiring meticulous verification of the applicant’s former citizenship status, residence in Italy, and compliance with the statutory timeframe. Nonetheless, its procedural simplicity—anchored in a mere declaration of will—makes it a uniquely accessible instrument for the reconstitution of Italian nationality, reflecting both legislative fairness and administrative efficiency.
Residence-Based Naturalisation for Descendants (Article 9, Law 91/1992 as Amended)
Another important innovation introduced by Law 74/2025 concerns the residence-based naturalisation process for descendants of Italian citizens. Recognising that the 2025 reform significantly narrows eligibility for iure sanguinis recognition, the Italian legislator has sought to balance this restriction by facilitating a more attainable alternative for those who maintain genuine ties to Italy but can no longer rely on an uninterrupted lineage.
Under the amended Article 9(1)(a) of Law 91/1992, a foreign national whose parent or grandparent is—or was—an Italian citizen by birth may now apply for Italian citizenship after two years of legal residence in Italy, rather than the three years previously required. This represents a meaningful relaxation of the residence condition, designed to encourage repatriation and integration of descendants of Italians abroad.
According to the Ministry of the Interior’s Circular of 28 May 2025, this amendment to Article 9(1)(a) expressly provides that Italian citizenship “may be granted to a foreign national whose father, mother or an ascendant in the direct line up to the second degree is or has been an Italian citizen by birth, and who has been legally resident in Italy for at least two years (instead of the three years previously required).” The Circular further clarifies that this remains a discretionary concession by the State, meaning that the right to apply does not entail an automatic entitlement to citizenship, but only the faculty to request it, subject to the evaluation of the Ministry of the Interior.
Although naturalisation remains a discretionary act of the State, dependent upon ministerial approval and subject to verification of good conduct, adequate income, and civic integration, the reduction of the residence period from three to two years significantly improves accessibility. For many applicants, especially those of Italian origin who move to Italy for study, work, or family reasons, the new timeframe makes the process far more viable in practice.
This amendment must be interpreted in conjunction with the reform’s overall objective: to promote active and recent bonds with the Republic. Whereas iure sanguinis recognition is premised on inherited legal status, naturalisation under Article 9 focuses on the re-establishment of a living connection with Italian society. The two-year residence requirement is thus a concrete measure of allegiance and participation: it presumes that a descendant who chooses to reside continuously and legally in Italy for this period has manifested a genuine will to integrate into the national community.
Importantly, this provision does not create a new automatic right to citizenship. It offers a facilitated discretionary pathway, meaning that the Ministry of the Interior retains the power to grant or deny applications based on the applicant’s individual circumstances and compliance with the general criteria established by law. These include, inter alia, the absence of criminal convictions, stable economic means, proof of linguistic competence in Italian (minimum B1 level), and evidence of lawful and uninterrupted residence.
From a policy perspective, the amendment signals a shift from purely genealogical to participatory citizenship. By rewarding descendants who demonstrate both heritage and a tangible, present-day commitment to Italy, the State seeks to transform historical affiliation into renewed civic membership. It thus embodies the reform’s underlying philosophy: citizenship should not be an abstract inheritance but the culmination of an active and verifiable bond with the country.
For practitioners advising clients of Italian descent, Article 9(1)(a) now stands as a strategic alternative to iure sanguinis recognition. It allows those whose ancestral line was interrupted—perhaps by a parent’s naturalisation abroad or by an administrative impediment under the new Article 3-bis—to requalify for citizenship through residence and integration rather than litigation.
In summary, the two-year residence rule constitutes a pragmatic and forward-looking complement to the reform’s restrictive provisions on descent. It transforms the narrative of Italian nationality from one of passive inheritance to one of voluntary participation, reaffirming that belonging to Italy is not only a matter of origin but also of presence, continuity, and contribution to the civic life of the Republic.
Administrative and procedural implications
The Ministry of the Interior’s Circular of 28 May 2025 introduces a new level of procedural rigour for the examination of citizenship claims. By transforming iure sanguinis recognition from a largely documentary exercise into a formal administrative investigation, the Circular establishes precise duties for both civil-status officers in Italy and consular authorities abroad. Its overarching objective is to ensure that every recognition of Italian citizenship reflects a demonstrable, lawful, and uninterrupted legal lineage, rather than a mere genealogical assertion.
Municipal and consular offices are now required to conduct a comprehensive verification of each applicant’s entire family line, tracing the transmission of citizenship generation by generation. This verification must confirm that at every link in the chain, the relevant ascendant was an Italian citizen at the moment of the descendant’s birth, and that no intervening act—such as voluntary naturalisation, renunciation, or loss under pre-1992 legislation—terminated that status before the next generation’s birth.
Where the examination establishes that a parent or other direct ascendant lost Italian citizenship prior to the applicant’s birth, the Circular mandates that the case be formally closed with a reasoned administrative denial, explicitly citing the legal interruption of the transmission of citizenship. This is a significant procedural development: whereas previously applications might remain pending or ambiguously deferred in the absence of conclusive evidence, the new system requires a definitive outcome, recorded in the municipal or consular register, to preserve procedural transparency and administrative accountability.
The Circular also requires the preparation of detailed administrative records (fascicoli istruttori) documenting each stage of the verification process. These records must include certified copies of all civil-status acts, naturalisation records, and certificates of non-naturalisation obtained from foreign authorities, together with any investigative correspondence conducted by the Italian office. Officers are instructed to cross-reference all data with the National Register of Italian Citizens Abroad (AIRE) and other relevant national databases to confirm consistency.
For Italian consulates, particularly those operating in jurisdictions with substantial Italian diasporas, such as London, Buenos Aires, New York, São Paulo, Toronto, and Sydney, the Circular represents both a clarification and an intensification of procedural obligations. Consulates must align their internal procedures with domestic practice, adopting the same interpretative framework as municipal offices in Italy. In effect, this eliminates the procedural discrepancies that historically existed between Italian municipalities and consular posts, ensuring uniform standards regardless of where the application is processed.
The Circular further stipulates that applications submitted after the critical date of 27 March 2025 must be assessed exclusively under the new regime introduced by Article 3-bis. No exceptions or discretionary leniency may be applied. Only cases covered by the transitional provisions—those filed or booked before that date—remain subject to the pre-reform rules.
Given the significant evidentiary demands and the variety of foreign jurisdictions involved in document verification, it is anticipated that the Ministry of the Interior will issue further interpretative notes to guide local authorities, especially regarding:
– The treatment of complex genealogical claims involving mixed nationalities (e.g. dual citizens by birth); – Verification of foreign naturalisation records where the relevant authorities no longer exist or their archives are incomplete; – The procedural management of multi-generational claims in which documentation from early emigrant periods is partially missing; – The authentication of electronic or digital records submitted under foreign legislation.
In parallel, municipalities and consulates are encouraged to enhance their internal training and inter-office coordination, given the technical complexity of assessing the “continuity of citizenship status” across generations.
From an administrative perspective, this new framework effectively transforms iure sanguinis recognition into a quasi-judicial determination, demanding from civil-status officials not only clerical precision but also a substantive legal evaluation of lineage continuity. The approach aligns with the reform’s central aim: to ensure that citizenship recognition is not a passive certification of ancestry, but a legally reasoned acknowledgment of an unbroken civic bond with the Italian Republic.
The result is a system that, while more demanding for applicants and authorities alike, promises greater uniformity, transparency, and legal certainty in one of the most sensitive and symbolically significant areas of Italian administrative law.
Doctrinal Evaluation: Balancing Blood and Belonging
Viewed through a doctrinal lens, the 2025 reform of Italian nationality law represents a profound recalibration of the relationship between ancestry and belonging — a deliberate movement away from an unbounded, hereditary interpretation of ius sanguinis towards a model of proximity-based citizenship, grounded in continuity, exclusivity, and genuine connection.
At its core, the reform embodies a shift from citizenship as inheritance to citizenship as proximity, where descent remains relevant but must coexist with a demonstrable, living nexus to the Italian State. The newly introduced Article 3-bis(1)(c) crystallises this transformation: it rewards the fidelity of ancestors who remained exclusively Italian — a symbol of undivided allegiance — while simultaneously rejecting claims founded on mere genealogical remoteness or on lines interrupted by voluntary naturalisation.
From a theoretical standpoint, this evolution brings Italian law into alignment with the principle of genuine connection recognised in international nationality doctrine, notably reflected in the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice (Nottebohm, 1955) and in the Council of Europe’s conventions on nationality. The reform thus situates Italy more closely within the broader European consensus that citizenship should represent an authentic and verifiable bond, rather than an indefinite extension of ancestral identity across generations detached from the national community.
However, as many practitioners have already observed, the new system is not without its tensions and inequities. The distinction between “exclusive” and “non-exclusive” citizenship, though conceptually clear, risks producing uneven outcomes among similarly situated descendants. An individual whose ancestor maintained dual nationality after 1992, when dual allegiance was legally permitted, can continue to transmit citizenship indefinitely; yet another whose ancestor acquired a second nationality before 1992 — often compelled by immigration laws or employment conditions abroad, and at a time when dual nationality was not recognised — finds the family’s lineage permanently broken.
This asymmetry reflects the law’s inherent difficulty in reconciling historical context with present legal standards. While Article 17-ter offers a temporary reacquisition window to partially correct these disparities, it benefits only the former citizens themselves, not their descendants. Families whose ancestors died without reacquiring Italian citizenship, or who renounced it voluntarily after 1992, remain excluded. As such, the reform succeeds in restoring coherence to the legal structure but not necessarily equity across generations.
From a policy perspective, the reform can thus be understood as an exercise in juridical containment rather than expansion. It refocuses Italian citizenship on tangible allegiance while acknowledging — but not fully remedying — the collateral injustices generated by the historical evolution of nationality law. This containment reflects a broader European trend: to treat citizenship not as a symbolic inheritance but as a status of effective membership in the civic community.
For Italy, a country with one of the largest diasporas in the world, this represents a decisive change in philosophy. The ius sanguinis remains, but it is now bounded by the principles of continuity, exclusivity, and proximity. In this new framework, blood alone no longer suffices; it must be accompanied by an enduring bond of civic identity, expressed either through the integrity of an unbroken lineage or through the voluntary re-establishment of ties via residence or reacquisition.
Ultimately, the 2025 reform can be seen as an attempt to balance heritage with belonging, law with equity, and history with modernity. It preserves the dignity of Italian citizenship by reaffirming it as both a legal status and a living connection — not simply the echo of ancestry, but the evidence of participation in the life of the Republic.
From Complexity to Confusion — and the Growing Need for Guidance
If Italian nationality law had already been intricate before the 2025 reform, it is now on the verge of becoming prohibitively complex — even for those who work within the system on a daily basis. The combination of Law 74/2025 and the Ministry of the Interior’s Circular of 28 May 2025 has produced a framework that, while intended to introduce coherence and proximity-based logic, has instead multiplied interpretative uncertainties and administrative hurdles. What was once a maze is now a labyrinth.
For practitioners — lawyers, consular officers, and municipal officials — the message of the Circular is theoretically clear but practically bewildering. The recognition of citizenship iure sanguinis is no longer an open-ended right but a conditional process dependent on continuity, exclusivity, and exhaustive documentation. The presence of an exclusively Italian parent or grandparent can still preserve eligibility, yet no mechanism can revive a broken chain once citizenship was lost. Every claim must now pass through a meticulous evidentiary filter: negative naturalisation certificates, verified lineage, authenticated translations, and official legalisation — all subject to discretionary verification by Italian authorities.
But if professionals find this new landscape demanding, for prospective Italian citizens it borders on the incomprehensible. Ordinary applicants — often living abroad, navigating linguistic and bureaucratic barriers — now face a process that is as opaque as it is unforgiving. They must secure historical birth, marriage, and naturalisation records across multiple jurisdictions; have them translated, legalised, and apostilled; submit them through consulates where appointment systems are saturated; and all the while fear that one overlooked detail, one mistranslation, or one missing apostille could lead to outright rejection.
In practical terms, even the first step — obtaining an appointment at an Italian consulate — has become for many an exercise in frustration. The reform and its transitional deadlines have only intensified demand, creating queues that stretch months, if not years, in cities such as London, Buenos Aires, New York, and São Paulo. For applicants abroad, the gap between legal entitlement and procedural access has never felt wider.
The Circular’s emphasis on administrative precision, though justified from a legal standpoint, risks deepening this divide between principle and practice. The aspiration to “restore coherence between citizenship and effective belonging to the national community” may remain unattainable if the system itself becomes inaccessible to those it seeks to regulate.
The 2025 reform therefore marks not only a turning point in Italian citizenship law but also a call to realism. Legal operators must navigate a framework that demands both technical expertise and interpretative discretion, while applicants require patient, qualified guidance to avoid procedural pitfalls. The law’s formal rigour, The 2025 reform therefore marks not only a turning point in Italian citizenship law but also a call to realism. Legal operators must navigate a framework that demands both technical expertise and interpretative discretion, while applicants require patient, qualified guidance to avoid procedural pitfalls. The law’s formal rigour, admirable in design, must now be matched by clarity, consistency, and empathy in its application.
In the current climate, professional support is no longer optional — it is essential. Those seeking recognition of Italian citizenship or registration of births abroad need more than documentation; they need direction. The risk of error is high, the margin for misunderstanding narrow, and the administrative system unforgiving.
If you are planning to register the birth of your children born abroad, or are considering applying for Italian citizenship or passport but feel uncertain about where to begin, do not face this complexity alone — reach out for expert assistance. I am here to help you navigate this evolving legal landscape, to protect your rights, and to ensure that your application stands on firm legal and procedural ground.admirable in design, must now be matched by clarity, consistency, and empathy in its application.
In the current climate, professional support is no longer optional — it is essential. Those seeking recognition of Italian citizenship or registration of births abroad need more than documentation; they need direction. The risk of error is high, the margin for misunderstanding narrow, and the administrative system unforgiving.
If you are planning to register the birth of your children born abroad, or are considering applying for Italian citizenship or passport but feel uncertain about where to begin, do not face this complexity alone — reach out for expert assistance. We are here to help you navigate this evolving legal landscape, to protect your rights, and to ensure that your application stands on firm legal and procedural ground (micheladejulio@mmweurope.com)
