📜 Italian Lawyer Restanio Defends Citizenship Rights of Descendants

Table of Contents

• Aggressive Media Campaign Against Italo-Descendant …

• The Power of Manipulative Language

• Discriminatory Language in Italian Consulates’ Web …

• Discriminatory Language in the K28/1991 Circular

• Worsening Bureaucracy in Italian Comuni

• In Conclusion

Aggressive Media Campaign Against Italo-Descendants

Lawyer Restanio highlighted a concerning media campaign that targets Italian descendants, which is actively manipulating public opinion to legitimise the elimination of citizenship by descent.

According to Lawyer Restanio, the journalistic approach is one where the press acts as both judge and prosecutor.

She asserted that this media campaign reached an aggressive level, necessitating an examination of the language employed by the press and its impact on legal perceptions.

She condemned the "humiliating accusations" and "derisive" expressions used by prominent journalists to devalue the image of Italian descendants.

The silent struggles of the first-generation Italian migrants, who dedicated their lives to transmitting Italian values and traditions, are invoked to underscore the injustice of this campaign.

Drawing on her experience as a lawyer dedicated to protecting the rights of Italians born abroad, and also as a descendant herself, she emphasised that Italian descendants, particularly those in countries like her native Argentina and Brazil, form a significant part of the population in many nations across the Americas.

The Power of Manipulative Language

The role of language is central to Lawyer Restanio's argument.

She asserted that not respecting the relationship between the signifier (the word) and the signified (its meaning) is being used to distort citizenship law.

This distortion leads to a fundamental alteration of the rights rightfully belonging to Italo-descendants.

The main distortion is the conceptualisation of the dual citizen (cittadino bipolide) as a "foreigner", thereby stripping them of their legal status as Italian citizens.

This "pathological application of linguistic categories" contributed to bureaucratic obstacles and therefore in the denial of citizenship applications.

Discriminatory Language in Italian Consulates’ Websites

Lawyer Restanio also criticised the discriminatory practices observed in Italian consulates’ websites in the Americas.

She pointed to the creation of a non-existent distinction between:

"direct descendants" (“figlio diretto”)

and

"the rest"

leading to preferential treatment for the former while the latter face inexplicable struggles to even secure an appointment to submit their applications, often waiting ten to twelve years, followed by further lengthy processing periods (730 days, DPCM 33/2014).

Lawyer Restanio highlighted the linguistic manipulation where:

direct descendants request “recognition"

while

other descendants are forced to request “reconstruction" 
of a citizenship status they never lost.

This seemingly innocent distinction has significant negative consequences, including different levels of assistance and prolonged bureaucratic delays for those deemed simply "descendants".

She argued that these excessive waiting times for appointments are a deliberate tool used by the administration to limit the flow of applications.

Discriminatory Language in the K28/1991 Circular

Lawyer Restanio highlighted that the language used in the K28/1991 Circular is discriminatory, because it labels Italo-descendants as "foreign citizens” of Italian lineage (cittadini stranieri di ceppo italiano).

This perpetuates the conceptual separation between "pure" Italians (cittadino monopolide) and those who acquired another nationality by birth in jus soli countries (cittadino bipolide).

Worsening Bureaucracy in Italian Comuni

Regarding applications submitted in Italy, Restanio detailed how administrative practices, lacking legal basis, have transformed the recognition procedure into an obstacle course.

Before 1990, a permesso di soggiorno (permit to stay) was not required. Then, until 2007, many Italian Comuni introduced the need for a three-month tourist permit to establish residency.

While European Union directives forced Italy to eliminate this requirement, allowing proof of presence through a declaration or Schengen stamp, the administration has continued to aggravate the process.

In particular, many Comuni now unjustifiably require applicants to remain within their municipality, prove employment, and demonstrate ties to the local community upon arrival.

Lawyer Restanio also cited the recent Circular 77/2024, which warns of rigorous checks on the applicant's residency in Italy.

In Conclusion

In her conclusion, Lawyer Restanio expressed hope in the continued role of the Italian Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court in safeguarding the rights of Italo-descendants, like they did in the past with decisions 4465/2009 and 4466/2009, Court of Cassation, followed by the “twin decisions” of 2002, and decisions 87/1975 and 30/1983, of the Italian Constitutional Court.

Lawyer Restanio’s concluded with a personal invocation of faith in the divine providence – the same God invoked by Italian families both in Italy and across the ocean.

Disclaimer: This content is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not exhaustive, does not constitute legal advice, and does not establish or replace a lawyer-client relationship. Always note the publication date, as legal information can become outdated. I do not assume any responsibility for any direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages arising from the use or misuse of any content on this newsletter/website or the content of pages linked to or from it. If you need legal assistance for your specific case, you must hire a legal professional.

Photo Credit: “Montalbano Elicona, ME, Italia” by Federico Di Dio