After final parliamentary voteLuxembourg enshrines freedom to abortion in constitution

Céline Eischen
adapted for RTL Today
Luxembourg has become the second country in the world currently in existence to enshrine the freedom to abortion in its constitution, following a final parliamentary vote on Tuesday afternoon.

The freedom to abortion has been officially enshrined in Luxembourg's constitution, following the second and final vote on the amendment in the Chamber of Deputies on Tuesday afternoon. A constitutional amendment requires two votes to become definitive. The first vote took place in March.

Fifty-one MPs voted in favour of the amendment, tabled by Marc Baum of the Left Party (Déi Lénk), with six voting against and two abstaining. In his speech, Baum described the occasion as a historic day for Luxembourg. With this vote, Luxembourg becomes the second country in the world, that is currently in existence, to enshrine abortion rights in its constitution – following France. It should be noted that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was the first country globally to do so, back in 1974.

The positions of the various parliamentary groups remained largely unchanged between the first and second votes. Laurent Zeimet, head of the Christian Social People's Party (CSV) parliamentary group, stressed that his party's MPs were permitted to vote according to their conscience.

Taina Bofferding, head of the Luxembourg Socialist Workers' Party (LSAP), described the amendment as a clear message to lawmakers and society.

Fred Keup, head of the Alternative Democratic Reform Party (ADR), criticised the move as "unnecessary" and called for more effective family policies instead.

Sam Tanson of the Green Party (Déi Gréng) welcomed the vote, arguing that it would create a guarantee for future generations. She noted that examples from abroad show that rights are not immune to changes in government, making a constitutional guarantee particularly important in the case of abortion.

Gérard Schockmel of the Democratic Party (DP), an outspoken opponent of the amendment, criticised it as making "false promises." He argued that the change would not offer a real guarantee, as the conditions for abortion could still be altered through a simple law. Marc Baum, the amendment's author, disagreed with Schockmel's assessment.

Back to Top
CIM LOGO