A question about citizenship, please

[Bajo_cero2]

I thought it had to be continuous. I read it one time and pretty sure it said continueous

Continueous. There are no rules, it is all allegation.

 

[PoorSoul]

Relatedly, has anyone ever lived in Argentina for > 2 years, left Argentina, and successful received citizenship based on the prior time they lived in Argentina?

 

[Bajo_cero2]

I won many cases on that basis, it is good enogh to start the case but 50% of the judges are going to wait until the second year of the second residency to grand citizenship.

 

[steveinbsas]

steveinbsas said:
I also wonder if the DNU 70/2017 was declared unconstitutional as far as citizenship is concerned, when was the two year exemption for citizenship based on marriage abolished?

All the others beside marriage and paternity/maternity are considered abolished.

Does this mean that citizenship is now only granted to those who are married to an Argentine or the parent of a child born in Argentina?

If so, was this the result of the DNU 70/2017...which I thought had been declared unconstitutional?

 

[steveinbsas]

PoorSoul said:
I thought it had to be continuous. I read it one time and pretty sure it said continueous

Continueous. There are no rules, it is all allegation.

Dose the word "allegation"in this context mean "arguable" or "arbitrary" (it's all up to the judge on a case by case basis)?

 

[Saninmdz]

steveinbsas said:
I also wonder if the DNU 70/2017 was declared unconstitutional as far as citizenship is concerned, when was the two year exemption for citizenship based on marriage abolished?



Does this mean that citizenship is now only granted to those who are married to an Argentine or the parent of a child born in Argentina?

If so, was this the result of the DNU 70/2017...which I thought had been declared unconstitutional?

In the same context to what Mr Steve is trying to ask about, a question just came to my mind: If all the other exceptions stated in the law 346, beside marriage and paternity/ maternity, are considered abolished. How could a person married to an Argentine spouse when going to the Court to apply for citizenship before two years (accompanied with the law 346 printed plus all the required documents) how could he/she convince the employee in the Court to take the file and start the process IF the employee is being obstinate and keeps saying that all those exceptions stated in the law 346 are considered abolished (due to ignorance or intentional stubbornness). In other words, how could you convince them that the "marriage and paternity/ maternity" are still valid and considered as your constitutional right.

 

[steveinbsas]

In the same context to what Mr Steve is trying to ask about, a question just came to my mind: If all the other exceptions stated in the law 346, beside marriage and paternity/ maternity, are considered abolished. How could a person married to an Argentine spouse when going to the Court to apply for citizenship before two years (accompanied with the law 346 printed plus all the required documents) how could he/she convince the employee in the Court to take the file and start the process IF the employee is being obstinate and keeps saying that all those exceptions stated in the law 346 are considered abolished (due to ignorance or intentional stubbornness). In other words, how could you convince them that the "marriage and paternity/ maternity" are still valid and considered as your constitutional right.

Base on what you wrote when you introduced this topic, it doesn't sound like the individual at the court in Mendoza disputes your right to apply for and receive Argentine citizenship...just that you have to be in Argentina for two years without interruption before it can be granted.

In your case, and as you previously asked, I wonder if it would be possible to hire a lawyer to get the ball rolling (i.e. initiate the process).

I also wonder, if (because you can't afford it) what could happen if you don't continue to have that lawyer pursue your case,

In other words, how likely is it the employee(s) at the court (who already told you that two years of continuous residency were required even though you are married to an Argentine) would be willing to "advance" your case (until you rehired he lawyer).

 

[steveinbsas]

steveinbsas said:
Does this include an unemployed person who is the spouse of an Argentine who works or retires who receive a pension from a foreign government or a private pension or trust?

Marriage means community of assets.
However, if someone signs an affidavit saying that supports you, that is Ok.

I still wonder about foreigners who receive a pension from a foreign government or a private pension or trust or some other form of stable foreign income (such as required by migraciones to receive the visa rentista or pensionado).

If they are not married to an Argentine or the parent of a child born in Argentina can they still apply for citizenship and if so, is the decision to grant it solely at the discretion of each judge??

 

[Saninmdz]

Mr Steve,

You made a very crucial questions and thank you for that! I think the only one (maybe there must be more) who can clarify that is Dr Rubilar.

When my wife went to the Court to ask, she went alone without me. The first person she met at the Court was a woman who seemed to have no idea about the requirements and then advised my wife to ask a man (whose job is to answer citizenship related questions). My wife tried to explain my situation and once she said that i am in Argentina since two months and half ago (at that time) he didn't even let finish her point and affirmed that "I have to reside in the country for two years before any application". (I don't know whether he said that due to the lack of informations or because he is simply rude and wants to put obstacles). Of course as soon as they let me apply, my intention is to stay in Argentina with my wife and her family not only for two years but for as long as possible (obviously while visiting my parents in my original country whenever I can) as I feel very comfortable and well welcomed here. But the employee at the Court he was referring to that two years is a condition before application and NOT before the citizenship is granted.

 

[PoorSoul]

I won many cases on that basis, it is good enogh to start the case but 50% of the judges are going to wait until the second year of the second residency to grand citizenship.

How can you win the case where the guy is deported? In that sense he is like the guy who left after 2 year residency. Once he was deported the residency ended right?