Revocation of grace nationality by law
Citizenship in Chile
- Eligibility
- Who is exposed to this ground (and what triggers it). By its own terms Art. 11 Nº4 revokes 'la nacionalización concedida por gracia', so ONLY persons who hold Chilean nationality by special grace under Art. 10 Nº4 ('Los que obtuvieren especial gracia de nacionalización por ley') are within its reach. Nationals by birth/jus soli (Art. 10 Nº1), by descent (Nº2) and by carta de nacionalización (Nº3) are categorically outside it — each of the other loss grounds is bucket-specific (Nº3 cancellation reaches carta holders; Nº2 reaches any Chilean who serves enemies in a foreign war; Nº1 is self-triggered renunciation). The 'trigger' here is neither an administrative finding nor a criminal conviction: it is the enactment of a revoking ley. Critically, the Constitution enumerates NO substantive grounds or conditions for when a grace revocation is warranted — unlike carta cancellation, which DFL 5.142 Art. 8 confines to a carta 'concedida con infracción a lo dispuesto en el artículo 3.o', supervening 'ocurrencias que hagan indigno al poseedor', or conviction under Ley 12.927. For grace revocation the constitutional text supplies only the instrument ('por ley'); the substantive criteria are left to the legislature, bounded solely by higher norms (ACHR guarantees, general constitutional principles). Because a grace grant is itself an individualised statute naming its beneficiary, the class exposed to CL-LOS-04 is correspondingly narrow and named rather than open-ended.
- Timeline
- standard
- Renunciation
- Not required
Who qualifies
Who is exposed to this ground (and what triggers it). By its own terms Art. 11 Nº4 revokes 'la nacionalización concedida por gracia', so ONLY persons who hold Chilean nationality by special grace under Art. 10 Nº4 ('Los que obtuvieren especial gracia de nacionalización por ley') are within its reach. Nationals by birth/jus soli (Art. 10 Nº1), by descent (Nº2) and by carta de nacionalización (Nº3) are categorically outside it — each of the other loss grounds is bucket-specific (Nº3 cancellation reaches carta holders; Nº2 reaches any Chilean who serves enemies in a foreign war; Nº1 is self-triggered renunciation). The 'trigger' here is neither an administrative finding nor a criminal conviction: it is the enactment of a revoking ley. Critically, the Constitution enumerates NO substantive grounds or conditions for when a grace revocation is warranted — unlike carta cancellation, which DFL 5.142 Art. 8 confines to a carta 'concedida con infracción a lo dispuesto en el artículo 3.o', supervening 'ocurrencias que hagan indigno al poseedor', or conviction under Ley 12.927. For grace revocation the constitutional text supplies only the instrument ('por ley'); the substantive criteria are left to the legislature, bounded solely by higher norms (ACHR guarantees, general constitutional principles). Because a grace grant is itself an individualised statute naming its beneficiary, the class exposed to CL-LOS-04 is correspondingly narrow and named rather than open-ended.
Legal basis
Route CL-LOS-04 is the loss of Chilean nationality by a statute (ley) that revokes a nationality previously granted by special grace. The operative text is the Constitution (CPR 1980, texto refundido vigente) Art. 11 Nº4: 'Por ley que revoque la nacionalización concedida por gracia' — loss '[b]y a law that revokes the naturalisation granted by grace'. It is one of the four closed-list grounds opened by the Art. 11 chapeau 'La nacionalidad chilena se pierde', sitting alongside voluntary renunciation (Nº1), supreme-decree war-service deprivation (Nº2) and carta cancellation (Nº3). The nationality it targets is that of Art. 10 Nº4: 'Los que obtuvieren especial gracia de nacionalización por ley' (those who obtain special grace of naturalisation by law). A defining structural feature is symmetry of instrument: grace is conferred 'por ley' and can be undone only 'por ley' — no administrative act suffices. The ground has been in force since the nationality chapter of the 1980 Constitution (marginal note 'CPR Art. 11º Nº 4 D.O. 24.10.1980', i.e. published 24 Oct 1980) and was NOT altered by the 2005 reform: Ley 20.050 Art. 1 Nº5 only 'Sustitúyese el número 1º' (renunciation) and 'Derógase el número 3.º' (old auto-loss), leaving the grace-revocation ground intact and merely renumbered from Nº5 (post-reform intermediate consolidation, CL-PRIMARY-01c) to Nº4 in the DS 100/2005 texto refundido. Persons who lose nationality on this ground 'sólo podrán ser rehabilitados por ley' (Art. 11, inciso final).
Example scenarios
CL-LOS-04 applies — loss by a law revoking grace nationality (Art 11 Nº4)
Const. Art 11 Nº4 makes nationality lost 'por ley que revoque la nacionalización concedida por gracia' (CL-ASSERT-074). Grace conferred 'por ley' (Art 10 Nº4) can be undone only by an instrument of equal rank — a statute enacted by the Congreso Nacional and promulgated by the President; there is no administrative decree, SERMIG file, or Consejo de Ministros step. Loss cascades to citizenship (Art 17 Nº1); rehabilitation only por ley (Art 11 inciso final).
CL-LOS-04 does NOT apply — carta holders face Nº3 cancellation (administrative), not Nº4 revocation-by-law
Const. Art 11 Nº4 reaches only grace nationals (Art 10 Nº4). A carta holder's loss runs through cancellation under Art 11 Nº3 / DFL 5.142 Art 8 (an administrative presidential decree), not a revoking statute (CL-LOS-04 eligibility). Scope distinction between the two involuntary grounds.
Art 12 reclamation (CL-RCL-01) is NOT available — a statute is not an 'acto de autoridad administrativa'
Art 12 is textually confined to deprivation/disavowal by an 'autoridad administrativa' (CL-ASSERT-082); a grace-revoking law is a legislative act, outside that scope, so a grace national — unlike a carta holder facing cancellation — does not hold the Art 12 writ (CL-LOS-04 litigation_posture). The available checks are constitutional control (plausibly Tribunal Constitucional; its reach over Art 11 Nº4 is not established in the corpus — NLR) and the ACHR/IACtHR backstop (Arts 20/27.2/62). Disconfirmation of the remedy.
INTERPRETIVE-OPEN (CL-NLR-LOS04-DESCENT-XREF-01) — whether the revocation defeats an already-vested descendant is unresolved
Art 10 Nº2 anchors descent on an ascendant who 'haya adquirido la nacionalidad chilena en virtud de lo establecido en los números 1º, 3º ó 4º' — Nº4 being grace. Because the anchor speaks of a past 'haya adquirido,' a later revocation arguably does not erase the descendant's already-vested nationality; but the primary text does not resolve it (CL-LOS-04 effect_and_consequences). Do not assert either outcome.
'Paulmann' is UNVERIFIED (CL-NLR-PAULMANN-01) — do not assert any actual grace revocation occurred; a mono-national revocation is barred by ACHR Art 20 anti-statelessness
The token 'Paulmann' does not appear anywhere in the decoded primary corpus — treat it as an unverified upstream illustration, not a primary-grounded fact; do not assert any actual grace revocation has happened. Substantively, a revocation leaving a grace national stateless collides with ACHR Art 20.1 ('Toda persona tiene derecho a una nacionalidad'), non-derogable under Art 27.2 (CL-ASSERT-091, CL-ASSERT-092). No decoded case shows Art 11 Nº4 ever exercised (CL-NLR-LOS04-CASELAW-01).
Informational summary compiled from primary legal sources — not legal advice. Citizenship law changes; verify with the competent authority before acting. Last verified 2026-07-06.
Track changes to this route
Descent and naturalization rules change. We'll email you in plain English when anything affecting Chile updates — no spam.