Argentine citizenship for foreigners?

[mini]

Sorry, Steve, I don't know anyone who has applied. I'll ask around this week & see if I can find someone.

 

[Attorney in BA]

LA NACIONALIDAD ARGENTINA
...
ART. 3º: Argentinos naturalizados.

Los extranjeros podrán obtener la nacionalidad argentina cuando se acredite:
...
b) tener dos años de residencia legal continuada en el territorio de la República;
...

What law is this? Do you have the number? This does not seem to be the text of the current citizenship law.

Yes, by reading the law 21.795, especially with the introduction (the will to abrodge the old low 346 that is +100 years old), it seems that two years of legal residence, certified by the DNM are required.


Old law 346 makes a distinction in-between ciudadania and the

French Jurist, law 21795 is no longer in force. Law 346 was reinstated by law 23059. To understand the current requirements you need to see that law (with its amendments and modifications) and decree 3213/84.

I am not asking the lawyers and I am not asking about those who applied as the spouse or parent of an Argentine, just those who applied as a foreigner living in Argentina.

As the OP asked lawyers not to post here, this is my only comment on the thread.

 

[A&A]

It does seem that the 2 year citizenship would be at odds with the 3 years needed (say for visa rentista) before you could apply for permanent residency. Citienship being considered a "higher level of residency" compared to mere "permanent resident."

Yes, the theory presented is an attempt to utilize different branches of government (judiciary v. executive (administrative offices of immigration)), so it is possible that the 2 routes could be inconsistent. However, I would think that the judiciary would be aware of the immigration departments policies and would be hesitant to go against it based on constitutional grounds.

Plus, making a constitutional argument would get very expensive, long and would definitely require a lawyer if not several. (Immigration specialist, constitutional specialist, procedural expert....hard to find in one person.)

Oh and about US dual citizenship: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

(that's the horse saying...ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh)

 

[French jurist]

French Jurist, law 21795 is no longer in force. Law 346 was reinstated by law 23059. To understand the current requirements you need to see that law (with its amendments and modifications) and decree 3213/84.
.

Yes, it seems I made a mistake, I'm referring to the law that was passed in 2003 if I recall. I'll search

 

[French jurist]

Yes sorry (memory failure), I was referring to ley 25.871.

If I may, Attorney, what's your opinion about the Supreme Court thing ?

 

[Attorney in BA]

Yes sorry (memory failure), I was referring to ley 25.871.

If I may, Attorney, what's your opinion about the Supreme Court thing ?

The Supreme Court basically says that immigration categories established by the immigration law and regulations do not apply to citizenship requests (this is a simplification). Thus, following this ruling, you would just need to be 2 years in the country, regardless of the migratory status, to fulfill the requirement for citizenship.

Please note that under Argentine law court rulings are valid only for the specific case where they were made, and do not have the general binding force that they have under common law. They are, however, a very important precedent that can be used to argue a case.

 

[Attorney in BA]

It does seem that the 2 year citizenship would be at odds with the 3 years needed (say for visa rentista) before you could apply for permanent residency. Citienship being considered a "higher level of residency" compared to mere "permanent resident."

Yes, the theory presented is an attempt to utilize different branches of government (judiciary v. executive (administrative offices of immigration)), so it is possible that the 2 routes could be inconsistent. However, I would think that the judiciary would be aware of the immigration departments policies and would be hesitant to go against it based on constitutional grounds.

Actually, the Supreme Court rulings (the one cited by French Jurist and the one by the Federal Supreme Court, not cited in the thread) state a different opinion and say that an administrative decision (immigration categories) cannot impose conditions not stated by the constitution and applicable citizenship laws (again, this is a simplification).

 

[steveinbsas]

It does seem that the 2 year citizenship would be at odds with the 3 years needed (say for visa rentista) before you could apply for permanent residency. Citienship being considered a "higher level of residency" compared to mere "permanent resident."

Yes, the theory presented is an attempt to utilize different branches of government (judiciary v. executive (administrative offices of immigration)), so it is possible that the 2 routes could be inconsistent. However, I would think that the judiciary would be aware of the immigration departments policies and would be hesitant to go against it based on constitutional grounds.

This occured to me as well, but I think it´s is an apples and oranges comparrison (at least I hope it is). I also hope the judiciary considers the constitution a higher authority than the immigration laws and decretos and judges no doubt consider themselves more authorative than the employees at migraciones.

As Attorney in BA pointed out:

The Supreme Court basically says that immigration categories established by the immigration law and regulations do not apply to citizenship requests (this is a simplification). Thus, following this ruling, you would just need to be 2 years in the country, regardless of the migratory status, to fulfill the requirement for citizenship.

As the OP asked lawyers not to post here, this is my only comment on the thread.

Comments from someone who knows what he´s talking about are greatly appreciated!

 

[French jurist]

Well, Attorney and Bajo-Cero, Gracias

 

[French jurist]

It does seem that the 2 year citizenship would be at odds with the 3 years needed (say for visa rentista) before you could apply for permanent residency. Citienship being considered a "higher level of residency" compared to mere "permanent resident."

Yop, in fact the ciudadania derivates from the nacionalidad. An Argentinean minor is an Argentinean national but has not -yet- all the rights of a ciudadano (like voting, etc)