The fear of a possible revocation of Spanish nationality concerns some Cubans who obtained citizenship through the so-called Grandchildren's Law, as explained by Estela Marina Pérez Cabrera, an expert in immigration and president of the Association of Descendants of Spaniards Worldwide (ADEM).
The representative warned about the uncertainty generated by the legal litigation related to nationalizations, although the decision made so far by the Supreme Court pertains to the right to vote and does not include the withdrawal of citizenship.
In an interview published this Tuesday in Diario de Cuba, Pérez explained that the concerns of the descendants of Spaniards living on the Island extend beyond their participation in the general elections scheduled for November 29.
“What people are concerned about is the annulment of nationality,” he stated while describing the worries he perceives among those who have taken advantage of the Law of Democratic Memory, enacted in Spain in 2022.
The specialist asserts that a potential court ruling declaring null an administrative instruction used to process numerous applications could raise questions about the status of those who obtained citizenship through that procedure.
It is, however, a possibility pointed out by the interviewee, not a legal consequence established by the Supreme Court.
The resolution known on October 12 maintains certain electoral restrictions but does not order the annulment of granted nationalities or the withdrawal of Spanish passports.
The origin of the controversy lies in an instruction signed on October 25, 2022, by Sofía Puente Santiago, who was then the Director General of Legal Security and Public Faith at the Spanish Ministry of Justice.
The regulation, published in the Official State Bulletin (BOE) on October 26, 2022, and effective from the 27th, outlined the procedures for exercising the right of choice for nationality as established in the eighth additional provision of the Democratic Memory Law.
One of its criteria established that the status of exiles would be presumed for Spaniards who left their country between July 18, 1936, and December 31, 1955, provided that their departure was documented.
This presumption facilitated the processing of applications from descendants who could demonstrate that their relatives emigrated during that period, but had difficulties providing specific evidence regarding the political, ideological, or other reasons that motivated their departure.
Pérez believes that precisely there lies one of the main problems for many Cuban families: to prove, decades later, the personal circumstances of an ancestor who left Spain.
The specialist questioned the difficulties involved in validating the reasons for the exile of a parent or grandparent who left the European country between 1936 and 1955, especially when several generations have passed and the available documentation is limited.
The Law of Democratic Memory includes various provisions for obtaining Spanish nationality, among them the descendants of exiled Spaniards, certain children of Spanish women who lost their nationality due to marriage, and adult children of individuals who acquired citizenship through legally established procedures.
Therefore, not all nationalizations processed under the Grandchildren's Law depend on the same legal assumption nor are necessarily linked to the questioned presumption of exile.
In the interview, the president of ADEM estimated that approximately 90% of the applicants referred to the 2022 instruction.
The representative also expressed concern for the individuals who still have pending applications or are awaiting documents related to their nationality, given the possibility that a future judicial ruling could change the criteria used up to this point.
It is important to distinguish between those who have formally acquired nationality and those who are still awaiting an administrative resolution.
Your legal situation is not identical, and the ruling of October 12 does not establish a general annulment of pending cases or granted nationalities.
Another obstacle pointed out by Pérez Cabrera is the economic cost of defending the rights of those affected before the Spanish courts.
According to him, many people living in Cuba hardly have sufficient resources to hire a lawyer and a delegate to represent them in the process.
The specialist believes that economic limitations, communication difficulties, and the everyday circumstances on the Island can particularly complicate the ability to respond to judicial measures within the established deadlines.
In this regard, he recalled that Cubans are facing immediate issues related to electricity supply, water, and food, which means that electoral participation in Spain is not necessarily their main concern.
The representative of ADEM stated that her organization submitted a formal request and a motion for reconsideration against the precautionary measures in September.
The Supreme Court confirmed on Monday, October 12, the precautionary restrictions related to registrations in the Census of Residents Absent (CERA) for certain Spaniards who were nationalized under the Law of Democratic Memory.
As explained in a report published after the court's ruling, the high court rejected the appeal from the State Attorney's Office and also did not heed the Prosecutor's request to allow the affected individuals to vote in the general elections on November 29.
According to the data provided by the Spanish government to the court, the restrictions potentially affect 163,020 voters, a figure that corresponds to individuals included in the universe of registrations reviewed for the elections and not to the total number of citizens who acquired nationality through the Grandparents' Law.
The measure refers to certain nationals who reside outside of Spain and whose electoral registration is associated with the application of the exile presumption of 2022. It does not constitute a universal suspension of the vote for all beneficiaries of the Democratic Memory Law.
There are also exceptions for those who can prove the legal requirements without relying on the questioned presumption. Likewise, the measure does not apply for that same reason to those who acquired nationality through that route and subsequently moved their residence to Spain.
The judicial order allows affected individuals to join the proceedings as co-defendants, represented by a lawyer and a solicitor, to present arguments concerning the precautionary measures.
To accomplish this, a period of five business days is established, starting from the day after the publication of the dispositive part of the order in the BOE. This condition is significant because the counting does not automatically begin with the date of the ruling or with the publication of news about the case.
The difficulties in exercising that right to a defense have also been questioned by representatives of Spaniards living abroad.
This Tuesday, the newspaper El País reported that the General Council of Spanish Citizens Abroad (CGCEE) is considering requesting the intervention of the Ombudsman to appeal the precautionary measures before the Constitutional Court.
The president of that advisory body, Violeta Alonso Peláez, warned of the technical difficulties in identifying within the CERA the specific individuals affected, since the census does not include a field that allows for the automatic distinction of the way in which each voter acquired nationality.
According to that information, the Council also considers the five business days provided insufficient to ensure an effective defense for all parties concerned, especially when they reside outside of Spain and require legal representation.
These objections concern the application of the electoral suspension and the procedural guarantees for those affected. They do not equate to a general challenge of their nationalities nor confirm that these will be revoked.
The distinction is essential: a precautionary suspension of the vote, the potential annulment of an administrative instruction, and the loss of an already acquired nationality are different legal issues.
The Supreme Court did not declare the general nullity of nationalities obtained through the Law of Democratic Memory in its ruling on October 12. It also did not order the cancellation of passports or the revocation of citizenship for those who have already acquired it.
For now, the confirmed immediate effect is the precautionary restriction of electoral rights for certain citizens residing abroad, while the judicial controversy over the application of the 2022 instruction continues.
Related videos:
Filed under: