Grand Duke Henri Refuses to Sign Euthanasia Law: December 2008


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

LadyLeana

Royal Blogger, TRF Author
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
1,270
City
-
Country
Belgium
The Grand-Duke is rumoured to follow in his uncle's footsteps. Apparently he will refuse to sign the law which will legalize euthanasia in Luxembourg.
Anyone else see a flashback to King Baudouin?
Article in Dutch (vrt)
 
I have always associated King Baudouin with being very faithful to the Catholic religion. Is the Grand Duke as devout (I'm not saying this in a rude, or criticizing manner)? I have always thought that Baudouin and Fabiola's close religion to the church was a beautiful thing.
 
I have to say I admire the Grand Duke for voting against something he thinks is wrong. Nowadays people are pressured into doing things that are wrong. Good for the Grand Duke to stand up for what he believes in!
 
He accepted his first grand-child Gabriel son of Louis , who was then only 19 years old..
 
The Grand-Duke is rumoured to follow in his uncle's footsteps. Apparently he will refuse to sign the law which will legalize euthanasia in Luxembourg.
Anyone else see a flashback to King Baudouin?
Article in Dutch (vrt)

:nonono:
I don't understand..."euthanasia" as in aided suicide ( a la Dr. Kevorkian) or does it mean abortion?
 
Sad , that this happen just before the wedding of Marie-Astrid's girl on this saturday!
 
:nonono:


I don't understand..."euthanasia" as in aided suicide ( a la Dr. Kevorkian) or does it mean abortion?

Euthenasia as in, people who have a terminal disease and who do not want to suffer any longer and end their lives, with the help of a doctor.
 
I think maria-olivia means it is sad for this to be overshadowing the wedding
 
From Reuters:

Luxembourg to strip Duke of powers over euthanasia

LUXEMBOURG (Reuters) - Luxembourg's government plans to strip Grand Duke Henri's power to sanction laws after he signaled he would not sign a bill legalizing euthanasia.
Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, who rushed back from an economic summit in Brussels, told a news conference on Tuesday that his government would seek a rewording of the constitution.

Read the entire article here.
 
an article of spanish newspaper el mundo:
Luxemburgo reducirá los poderes de su soberano tras el veto a la ley de eutanasia | elmundo.es

i understand the grand duke. however, the public uproar seems huge - i think he should have done something similar to king badouin and let the parliament go ahead with the law without his consent rather than publically oposing it. i hope the prime ministers rethinks the reduction of the grand duke's power.

I agree with you, Carlota. He should follow in King Badouin's footsteps. It would be a very sad thing to have his power reduced.
 
Well, I think it is rather irresponsible of the Grand Duke. If he does not want to sign a law he should abdicate in favour of his son, if he does not want to abdicate he should sign the law. He can't have it both ways and he is a constitutional monarch after all! Another thing is that king Baudouin reigned for 40 years or so when he was in a strong enough position to refuse to sign, while the grand duke is just getting started and doesn't has a position as respected as his uncle yet (and probably he never will, as king Baudouin was an exceptional monarch).
 
Last edited:
WOW... I could not have imagined high dramas in a quiet place such as Luxembourg. Euthanasia is rather controversial issue. Thus, I fully understand Grand Duke Henri's unwillingness to sign the law.
Grand Duke Henri should abdicate ... for ever or a certain period of time ?
 
I think to abdicate for a certain period was only possible in Belgium, and even there as an exception. It has never been tried anywhere else and I find the whole thing of abdicating for a day rather odd. You either abdicate or you don't. If GD Henri's conscience can not be unified with his role as constitutional monarch he should abdicate for good and leave his son to it. If he starts abdicating now for a day he might start the jojo effect; abdicating when the Lux. parlament want to pass other ethical laws in the future like gay marriage, a more liberal abortion law etc. etc. for example. Apart from that, the GD seems to want to make a firm point against the law, well, adbicating for a day and have somebody else sign a law, after which you continue to act as if nothing happened is not really a firm stand. It is rather hypocritical as the law that was passed still is signed in the GD's name.

Of course it is understandable that the Grand Duke has difficulties with this law, as many people have. But his personal point-of-view should not get in the way of his constitutional duty.
 
I see. Given your opinion, I think that it would be better for Grand Duke Henri to sign the law. Grand Duke Guillaume is very young to assume the burden of ruling the country.
 
Of course it is understandable that the Grand Duke has difficulties with this law, as many people have. But his personal point-of-view should not get in the way of his constitutional duty.

I completely agree with you, Marengo. Personal points of view and constitutional duty are not always going to match up. I imagine that it would be difficult for him to do this personally, but it sounds like the best thing for his people would be for him to sign the law.
 
I think to abdicate for a certain period was only possible in Belgium, and even there as an exception. It has never been tried anywhere else and I find the whole thing of abdicating for a day rather odd. You either abdicate or you don't. If GD Henri's conscience can not be unified with his role as constitutional monarch he should abdicate for good and leave his son to it. If he starts abdicating now for a day he might start the jojo effect; abdicating when the Lux. parlament want to pass other ethical laws in the future like gay marriage, a more liberal abortion law etc. etc. for example. Apart from that, the GD seems to want to make a firm point against the law, well, adbicating for a day and have somebody else sign a law, after which you continue to act as if nothing happened is not really a firm stand. It is rather hypocritical as the law that was passed still is signed in the GD's name.

Of course it is understandable that the Grand Duke has difficulties with this law, as many people have. But his personal point-of-view should not get in the way of his constitutional duty.

If the regent just rubber stamp whatever law is presented then what is the purpose of having him (her) involved? If that is the case his signature means absolutely nothing. I applaud The Grand Duke to object to this law. Perhaps people will have a chance to reflect on the impact this law will have on particularly the elderly. ...Why hanging around when you are old and "useless" when you can end it quickly before the inheritance has been used up...
 
Firstly, euthanasia is only used in cases where a patient is terminally ill. I know that in Belgium, for instance, you need to go through a lot of paperwork before you can have euthanasia. And no, people around a patient are not allowed to ask for this in the place of someone who is not capable of asking it themselves, except when the patient has already expressed the desire for euthanasia when they were still capable of doing this. It really isn't a way to get rid of old and "useless" people, but it is a way to help people die with dignity, in their chosen condition, at teir chosen time, at their chosen place. And it is the choice of the patients themselves.

Secondly, the whole point of a constitutional monarch is that he accepts laws which are voted by a majority in parliament. Just like his uncle Baudouin, the Grand-Duke must accept that there is a difference between the monarch and the private person. As a private person, he is entitled to whatever opinion he has on the matter. But as a monarch, it is his duty to accept the decisions of his government/parliament.
I think he could try to adress Parliament with his concerns about the law, and maybe try to convince the MP's to vote against the law. But he cannot flatout refuse to sign the bill when it has been passed by the majority. Luxembourg is a democratic country, and if a majority of MP's accepted the law, the Grand Duke has to accept it as well. That's the principle of democracy.

Also, please remember that most European Heads of State (monarchs or presidents) do not have the same kind of power as the President of the USA. Most of them have a more symbolical function, and the actual power of government lies with the Prime Ministers, whereas the President of the USA is not only head of state, but, if I'm not mistaken, also Head of Government.
And those Heads of State which do have more governmental power, are wary of using it, because of the democracy principle.
 
The Grand Duke would be excommunicated from the Catholic Church if he signed the document and he made a choice to prevent that from happening. As a Roman Catholic he CAN NOT sign it, even if he wanted to without risking the Pope telling him he can not receive sacraments any longer (which is what excommunication is). It's why his Uncle abdicated for a day. He's between a rock and a hard place here. It's his faith or a rubber stamp which apparently means nothing anyway. Easy choice, in my opinion. If Luxembourg wants a Catholic monarch, they had to have understood that would be the decision. It's not like the Church has changed their opinion on this type of issue from when his Uncle abdicated.
 
Last edited:
Who can say that if Henri abdicates and Guillaume becomes the Grand Duke that he also would refuse to sign this piece of legislation into law?
I live in Washington state and a euphanasia bill was just passed. As I understand it, a person wishing to die in this manner has to be examined and questioned by several doctors and psychiatrists. It is a long and very involved process.
 
The Grand Duke would be excommunicated from the Catholic Church if he signed the document and he made a choice to prevent that from happening. As a Roman Catholic he CAN NOT sign it, even if he wanted to without risking the Pope telling him he can not receive sacraments any longer (which is what excommunication is). It's why his Uncle abdicated for a day. He's between a rock and a hard place here. It's his faith or a rubber stamp which apparently means nothing anyway. Easy choice, in my opinion. If Luxembourg wants a Catholic monarch, they had to have understood that would be the decision. It's not like the Church has changed their opinion on this type of issue from when his Uncle abdicated.

So what comes first. religon or the state/ This is the very thing that Islamic states are criticsed for, putting the religon before a democratically elected parliment. I understand he is in a difficult position and certainly would not want to be im his position but as a democratic country then majority rules, not some fellow in a totally different country.
 
This is a very difficult situation and one in which a solution might not easily be found. What is the general consensus on euthanasia in Luxembourg? Does it have much support from the citizens of Luxembourg? It has always been my hope that a good monarch is there unltimately to protect and support the people of a nation so that if the government of the day tries to bring in unpopular laws that are clearly not desired by the people, the monarch should step in and veto that law. Perhaps the solution in this instance only (i.e. where there is a "threat" of major constitutional change or possible abdication) there should be a referendum and the Grand Duke and government of Luxembourg agree to back down from their individual stances depending on the result.
Democracy is a strange thing sometimes - the people get to vote for a government every few years but it ends there (and you might not get the government you voted for) and the government of the day could well end up bringing in laws you didn't vote for. So in sitiations like this I think a referendum would be ideal.
 
The Grand Duke would be excommunicated from the Catholic Church if he signed the document and he made a choice to prevent that from happening. As a Roman Catholic he CAN NOT sign it, even if he wanted to without risking the Pope telling him he can not receive sacraments any longer (which is what excommunication is). It's why his Uncle abdicated for a day. He's between a rock and a hard place here. It's his faith or a rubber stamp which apparently means nothing anyway. Easy choice, in my opinion. If Luxembourg wants a Catholic monarch, they had to have understood that would be the decision. It's not like the Church has changed their opinion on this type of issue from when his Uncle abdicated.

I don think the Vatican will excommunicate the grand duke, it would be very unwise and they haven done so when the Belgian king signed the euthanasia law. Of course they might have tried to influence the Grand Duke, they tried the same on king Juan-Carlos of Spain when the gay-marriage bill was passed. He told them basically to bugger of, adding that he was no king Baudouin (in the sense of not a 'puppet' of the Vatican).
 
The Grand Duke would be excommunicated from the Catholic Church if he signed the document and he made a choice to prevent that from happening. As a Roman Catholic he CAN NOT sign it, even if he wanted to without risking the Pope telling him he can not receive sacraments any longer (which is what excommunication is). It's why his Uncle abdicated for a day. He's between a rock and a hard place here. It's his faith or a rubber stamp which apparently means nothing anyway. Easy choice, in my opinion. If Luxembourg wants a Catholic monarch, they had to have understood that would be the decision. It's not like the Church has changed their opinion on this type of issue from when his Uncle abdicated.

Total bogus.Who/whatever makes you think he would be excommunicated from the RC?Nonsense,absolutely nonsense,
they have nothing to do with it.Church and State are separated,even in catholic Luxembourg.They are no doubt happy with his decision,but had he signed,there would have been nothing,nothing at all they could,or would,have done.It is not of their business.

The Grand Duke has the right to veto a law,it is his prerogative so he has every right,and he used it in this case of the euthanasia law.
PM Juncker,who also opposes the euthanasia law btw but strongly feels it should be Parliament to decide,will now have a quick change of the Constitution to lift the right to veto by the Grand Duke.Rightfully so,a Constitutional Monarchy should not have a right to veto for the Monarch where parliament,and only them,are to decide.Due to his orthodox catholic faith (I am catholic myself but unlike Henri and his family,not holyer
than thou) he can not sign this law,at least that is what he feels,and can feel since he has the prerogative of vetoing anything.

That might have worked well in medieval times,but again,a Constitutional Monarch does have the right to be heared and consulted,but
when it comes to the actual execution of Law,signing of it after which it becomes law,that should be it,no obstruction of Laws decided
on by Parliament.That is how matters are done in the other european Monarchies too.

Oh well,it is a nice and sleepy Duchy,matters will calm down sooner then this thread is finished,it's just due to it's size,anything that
happens in that small beautifull little spot is blow'n up to disproportionate sizes and news agencies are always
eager to pick this sort of thing up as if there's a revolution of sorts at hand.There isn't.

Henri just opposed a very strict euthanasia law.Before anyone thinks that allowing euthanasia has people calling their GP's and ask for a shot to the heavens...NO that is not how that works.There is a very strict protocol,here that is,in The Netherlands.A patient must have severe pains and no sight at fully recuperating other than being,fi,paralised and in terrible pain,or in a terminal state due to fe cancer,MS etc..Two independent GP's will come and have a talk with you to check you know what you want and you're capable of expressing your will,and repeat that procedure within three weeks after which an awfull lot of papers and what not has to be filled in and another talk will take place in which a date and time is set.
(Awfull really,as I witnessed several times,not awfull in deeds,but hear/witness making an appointment for a certain day and a certain hour that the GP comes and delivers that awfull smelling drink) but it is the will of the patient.
More often then not,the entire procedure takes much longer then the patient has time of life.

Henri didn't set a foot wrong,but he should be stripped of his right to veto,Constitutional Monarchs do not have that,not here,not in Denmark and not in China...
 
Last edited:
Belgian's ex Prime Minister Wilfried Maertens said that what happened with King Baudouin more than 15 years ago , should not be possible nowadays.
 
Belgian's ex Prime Minister Wilfried Maertens said that what happened with King Baudouin more than 15 years ago , should not be possible nowadays.

I can very well understand him,he had the toughest time to find a plausible elegant outcome when dear Baudouin refused to sign the Abortion-Law.The King was declared temporarely incapacitated.
 
I would of thought this would be the decision of Luxembourg's parliament not that of the Grand Duke's
 
I would of thought this would be the decision of Luxembourg's parliament not that of the Grand Duke's

GD Henri does have the right to veto,it is one of his prerogatives.A Law becomes effective after the Grand Duke has
signed it and it has the counter-sign of the government minister involved.

Ofcourse parliament has the decision,it will now lift him of that prerogative to veto law approved by parliament,it shouldn't
have happened as former belgian PM Wilfried Martens,in a reaction to this,said,it should never have happened again after
he had to deal with the late King Baudouin's decision to not sign the belgian Abortion Law and Martens had to find an elegant
way out of that.He did,the King was declared incapacitated to Reign,for 24 hours.
 
I would of thought this would be the decision of Luxembourg's parliament not that of the Grand Duke's
If that is the case why would it matter if he signs or not?
 
Back
Top Bottom