Portugal's top court blocks bill restricting immigration
Immediately after late Friday's decision, President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa sent the bill back to parliament, which is on recess until September. Last month, the president told the court to check the document for potential infringements of the principles of equality, proportionality and legal security.
The bill illustrates the rightward shift in politics in much of Europe, as governments try to fend off the rise of the far-right by being tougher on immigration.
The bill would have made hundreds of thousands of migrants legally resident in Portugal wait for two years before they could request permission for immediate family members to join them. Only highly-skilled workers and investors with special residence permits would be exempt.
The court ruled that the bill was "likely to lead to the separation of family members" of foreign citizens legally resident in Portugal, which it said would be a "violation of the rights enshrined in the constitution".
Last year, the government scrapped a programme that allowed migrants entering Portugal on a tourist visa or waiver to stay and get residence permits if they find work.
Immigrants from the Community of Portuguese Language Countries still enjoy most such privileges but the bill would impose the requirement of a long-term work or residence visa that they would need to apply for in the country of origin.
Parliament approved the bill on July 16 with support from the centre-right ruling coalition and far-right Chega party, which emerged as the second-largest parliamentary force in a May general election.
Left-wing opposition parties have criticised the government for what they call an inhumane bill, and for allowing Chega to impose its anti-immigration agenda on the minority administration.
The government denies such accusations, arguing that immigration inflows require better controls, and has already said it intends to adjust the bill to the court's objections.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
3 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘The Left blacklisted me for criticising smug London Review of Books'
The founder of a literary magazine claims he has been blacklisted by the Left for criticising the London Review of Books (LRB) as 'smug'. Booklaunch, the UK's most widely distributed literary magazine, had previously given out tens of thousands of free copies of its publication with The Spectator and The New Statesman. But now Dr Stephen Games, its founder and editor, claims his independent literary magazine has been 'no-platformed' and 'cancelled' by The New Statesman under pressure from the LRB. Dr Games alleged the LRB 'poured poison in the ear of The New Statesman', causing it to sever its ties with Booklaunch. 'It's dirty and shabby and inexplicable that magazines that ought to be committed to free expression and plurality of expression should feel that Booklaunch is so threatening to them that they have to shut it out of existence,' he claimed. The New Statesman and the LRB have declined to comment on the row, and it remains unclear exactly why the relationship has soured. However, Dr Games believes it can be traced back to last summer's Issue 20 of Booklaunch, which carried an editorial that read: 'We used to worship at the LRB's altar. Not any longer.' The editorial went on: 'Something has happened at the LRB that makes one warier of its contributors and less confident about their judgments. The magazine's once unrivalled openness has been replaced by small-mindedness in which the rigour of proper argumentation is now accompanied by labelling, dog whistles and taunts. 'Fun for those who like that sort of thing; dishonourable if you hold the LRB to a higher account. So limited has the LRB become in what it will examine openly that it seems to be suffering from locked-in syndrome.' LRB coverage of Middle East criticised The editorial goes on to criticise the LRB for its coverage of the Middle East as 'uniformly one-sided', and compares it to Nazi 'propaganda', adding: 'Such a lack of balanced analysis does a disservice to the complex and deeply contested nature of the conflict... 'Der Stürmer [the Nazi propaganda tabloid] was similarly effective in its day: we often underrate propaganda as always crude and obvious; on the contrary, it can be intelligent, sophisticated, difficult for the ordinary reader to find fault with and attractive to read. Those who commission these essays are complicit... 'As it stands, its writing on the Middle East is reminiscent of the Inquisition – admit you're a heretic so we can burn you or deny it until we've tortured you to death.' The piece also accuses the LRB for endorsing 'the culture of the smug', with its 'side operation selling commercial fripperies, from branded tote bags to high-priced picnic blankets and umbrellas', and for having an array of writers hailing from 'upper class stock', citing Mary Wellesley, the daughter of the Marquess of Douro and Princess Antonia of Prussia, as an example. It also alleges the editorial team are 'ensconced in their Bloomsburian towers, away from the practical realities they critique and the divisions they promote'. Dr Games said the LRB also used to distribute Booklaunch, but claimed it terminated that arrangement following a misapprehension about Booklaunch allegedly telling an advertiser that it was part of the same stable as the LRB. Despite this, Booklaunch continued to have a positive relationship with its other distributors, The New Statesman and The Spectator, for around six years. 'Suddenly, and completely out of the blue, these two important media vehicles of the political Left [The New Statesman and the LRB] are acting in concert to squeeze us out,' Dr Games claimed. 'They must have a motive, but I can only guess what it might be. It looks to me like spiteful political cancelling.' 'Fine upstanding organs of the Left' Dr Games claimed it was 'very odd' that 'two major players should collude – which is what it looks like – to shut another player out of the market', describing Booklaunch as a 'minnow' by comparison. He said: 'It feels like the sort of thing that a cartel would do to prevent competition. 'It's an action which goes against what you would expect to be each magazine's commitment to free speech and free expression... they're both fine upstanding organs of the Left, and fine upstanding organs of the Left have recently been getting into the habit of, you know, cancelling people they don't like and no-platforming them. 'And this would seem to be an example of that.' The Telegraph has seen confirmation from The New Statesman that it planned to circulate Booklaunch in May, but that this never happened. The New World has since replaced The New Statesman as a distributor of Booklaunch.
Reuters
3 minutes ago
- Reuters
US ready to be part of security guarantees for Ukraine, Germany's Merz says
BERLIN, Aug 16 (Reuters) - The U.S. is ready to be part of security guarantees for Ukraine, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Saturday, a day after a summit in Alaska between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. "And the good news is that America is ready to participate in such security guarantees and is not leaving it to the Europeans alone," Merz told German public broadcaster ZDF after being briefed together with other European leaders by Trump on his talks with Putin. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is due to meet Trump on Monday in Washington, after which a three-way meeting between Putin, Trump and Zelenskiy should be held as soon as possible with the aim of reaching a peace agreement, Merz said. "If that works out, it's worth more than a ceasefire," he said. Merz said Trump had indicated that Russia seemed ready to negotiate based on the front lines of the conflict, rather than the borders of Ukrainian regions it claims. "This is a huge difference because Russia is claiming territories that it hasn't occupied yet," he said. Speaking separately to German broadcaster n-tv, Merz said he did not think Zelenskiy would face as difficult a time in Washington with Trump as he had in February, when the two leaders clashed in an extraordinary exchange before the world's media at the White House. Merz said Zelenskiy would on Sunday talk to European leaders who would help him prepare for the meeting. "We'll give a few good pieces of advice," he said. Merz told ZDF that while it was important that Europe stand united, the U.S. would for the time being continue to play the decisive role in the war, which has raged since 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. "The American president has the power both militarily and via appropriate sanctions and tariffs to ensure that Russia moves more than it currently does," he said.
The Guardian
3 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Farage adviser said UK would be better off if it had not fought Nazi Germany
An adviser used by Nigel Farage and others in Reform UK to boost their social media popularity has suggested that Britain would be better off had it stayed neutral in the second world war instead of fighting Nazi Germany. Jack Anderton, who ran Farage's hugely successful TikTok account before helping Luke Campbell become the Reform mayor of Hull and East Yorkshire, also said the UK should not support Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression. In a post on his personal blog about Britain's international standing, Anderton said that in a future world of 'meritocracy', the UK could 'regain' former colonies such as Australia, Canada and South Africa. He added that the UK should copy the policy of mass incarceration carried out by El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, widely condemned as an abuse of human rights. Anderton has never been employed by Reform but the 23-year-old established Farage on TikTok, where he now has 1.3m followers, before working closely on Campbell's election campaign. He remains a central part of Campbell's circle, and the mayor is known to have made efforts to get him on to his roster of staff, which have been thwarted because he cannot have political appointees. Anderton's personal blog, titled Britain Needs Change, includes an entry from last year about what he called 'a self-interested British foreign policy', arguing that the only conflict in the last century that was in the UK's interest was the Falklands war. 'Trillions of pounds of British taxes have been spent in foreign lands in the pursuit of 'democracy', 'human rights' and 'doing what is right',' the post said. 'More than a million British lives have been lost since WW1 in wars and battles that have never once been fought by British men, on this island.' Fighting in both the world wars ensured the UK was no longer a great power, he wrote: 'We impoverished ourselves for decades, we didn't finish paying the loans off to America until 2006. Our economy stagnated, we lost an empire, and we are pushed around by America. And Germany, a country we beat, has been richer than us since the 1970s. 'Alternative history is interesting; if Britain had not fought in WW1 and WW2, it would not have had to rely on America for economic support, and it would have had the independence to act accordingly. Britain could have developed India, Cyprus, Fiji, Malta, Saint Lucia, Seychelles, the Bahamas, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Ireland and New Zealand. In the coming meritocracy, perhaps Britain could regain some of these nations.' The same post also argues against providing support for Ukraine after Russia's invasion: 'We are sending billions of pounds (that we cannot afford) to prop up a country that we have no allegiance to. Russia is not our enemy, they have not attacked Britain.' Anderton calls for a shake-up of the Foreign Office so that all decisions are made purely on the basis of whether or not they benefit Britain: 'Instead, what we have are people who should be working for the UN or a charity rather than working in the British Foreign Office.' In another post from 2024, on crime, Anderton enthusiastically endorses the policies of Nayib Bukele, who has dramatically cut gang violence and wider crime through mass detentions that have put 2% of El Salvador's population in prison. 'Extraordinary times require extraordinary measures,' he wrote. 'I'd even argue the measures aren't that extraordinary and should be in place in times of normalcy. 'El Salvador is perhaps a lesson for those in Britain who wish to take back control of their country. Power works, and it is all that matters. State power when used effectively is basically omnipotent. The meritocracy will be established, criminals and corrupt officials will be jailed, immigration will drop to zero, houses will be built, and our citizens will once again feel proud of the country they call home.' Anderton was contacted for comment. Campbell's office referred the matter to Reform UK, who said Anderton was not employed by either the party or the mayor.
