We are back to talking about citizenship. Regardless of the circumstances that would seem to have brought the issue back to the center of public debate, and political in the first place, the discussion on the point would seem to appear in all its necessity. It would seem, in fact, to be a highly ideologically divisive debate that, if within the current government majority it would seem to meet the openness of Forza Italia, willing to discuss the potential introduction of the ius scholae, on the other hand, since the specific issue is not part of the political program, it would seem not to be able to be shared by the allies of Fratelli d'Italia and Lega, not even in its mediated hypothesis, so to speak.
Upon closer inspection, it might be appropriate to focus the terms of the debate on certain evidence, or at least what would appear to be such. First of all, that the law on Italian citizenship has now passed the threshold of thirty years of age, if one may say so. Then, that, in this sense, that same law may need adjustments suitable to reflect the changes that have occurred in the meantime in the composition of civil society, which has become, if one may say so, multi-ethnic. Finally, that, to be clearer, and simply recalling it, the law of 5 February 1992, number 91, is based, at present, on the principle of the so-called ius sanguinis, by virtue of which anyone born to an Italian citizen mother or father acquires citizenship by right at birth. Well.
Today the debate on the subject, animated by the center-left, brings to the attention and general evaluation, the issue relating to the introduction of new (old) principles reflecting different ways of acquiring Italian citizenship that are suitable to represent the needs that have matured over the years within civil society. Starting from the expansion of the hypotheses of the so-called ius soli, granted only in exceptional cases to children of unknown and/or stateless parents or when the child is unable to obtain any citizenship in the presence of rules of the country of origin that prevent the acquisition of the citizenship of the parents. Probably, at this point, any question on the opportunity to proceed with the modification of the law on citizenship could appear rhetorical, but probably still useful when one wants to consider that a reform project of such consistency must meet the different sensibilities on the subject existing within the civil community of members.
