Principality of Monaco – On 18 November, in an interview with the daily Monaco-Matin, Prince Albert II announced that he will not promulgate the bill approved by the National Council last May (19 votes to 2). The proposal would have legalised voluntary abortion up to 12 weeks, extended the limit to 16 weeks in cases of rape, and lowered the age of parental consent from 18 to 15. The sovereign stated that he “understands the sensitivity of this issue” but believes that “the current framework respects who we are, in light of the role that the Catholic religion occupies in our country, while still ensuring safe and more humane support.”
The refusal blocks the legislative process and keeps the existing framework in place. The current system, which does not deny any rights, already allows access to abortion in three clearly defined circumstances: rape, serious danger to the mother’s life, foetal malformation. These are the only cases in which such an interruption can be justified. In every other situation, it must be called for what it is: homicide.
The current law: what Monaco’s legislation provides
Abortion in Monaco remains formally illegal, though decriminalised since 2019, and permitted only in the exceptional cases introduced by the law of 8 April 2009: rape, life-threatening risk to the mother, serious foetal malformation. For decades before that, the Principality maintained one of the most restrictive laws in Europe, banning abortion under every circumstance. Women who underwent the procedure risked up to three years in prison, doctors up to five years and the loss of their licence to practise. Today, although still illegal in Monaco, abortion is not prosecuted if carried out abroad, especially in France, where it is legal.
Catholicism as the State religion
The Constitution of the Principality recognises Catholicism as the State religion. This is not a mere cultural reference but shapes the anthropological vision of the legislator and underpins the Prince’s veto. In this light, his position can only be understood by recognising that, for the Church, nascent life is a non-negotiable good, beyond any utilitarian or functional logic.
Why abortion is morally unacceptable
The Church is unequivocal in teaching that direct abortion is always morally illicit. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith affirms that “human life must be respected and absolutely protected from the moment of conception” and that “from the first century the Church has declared the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed. It remains unchangeable.” Direct abortion is therefore “gravely contrary to the moral law” and, together with infanticide, constitutes “abominable crimes” (Gaudium et spes 51).
The encyclical Evangelium Vitae offers the most precise and dramatic formulation, defining abortion as “the deliberate and direct killing, by whatever means, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence, extending from conception to birth” (EV 58). Saint John Paul II, besides condemning it firmly, denounces the linguistic distortion that seeks to disguise its nature. He urges us to “call things by their proper name”, reminding us that “we must call murder by its proper name: murder is murder.” Hence the theological judgement, clear and definitive: “direct abortion […] is always a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being” (EV 62). The 1974 declaration of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith recalls ancient roots: “You shall not kill with abortion the fruit of the womb” (Didache 2,2) and echoes Tertullian’s statement that preventing birth “is a pre-emptive murder”. The Church’s condemnation of abortion is therefore not the result of a modern doctrinal hardening, but the coherent expression of an unchanging anthropological and moral vision.
No law can make just what is unjust
A decisive point in understanding Monaco’s choice lies in what the Magisterium teaches about the relationship between civil law and abortion. Evangelium Vitae is explicit in judging radically unjust any law that authorises it: such norms “are laws lacking any authentic juridical validity” and therefore “create no obligation” (EV 72–74). Saint John Paul II speaks of a “tragic semblance of legality” and warns that a democracy permitting the elimination of the weakest “is on the path to a form of substantial totalitarianism” (EV 20). Thus, abortion cannot be construed as a right, because it denies the most elementary of human rights: “the inalienable right to life of every innocent human being is a constitutive element of civil society.”
Monaco and the responsibility of a State that recognises the value of life
Prince Albert II’s veto cannot be read as an ideological gesture but as an affirmation of anthropological and juridical coherence. In a country where Catholicism is the State religion, the defence of unborn life is not a confessional residue but a political vision: the conviction that a civilisation is measured by its ability to protect those who have no voice. Abortion is not a matter of “choice” but of justice: an act that eliminates an innocent, always “weak, defenceless, totally entrusted” to the mother (EV 58). Amid cultural and legislative pressures in Europe pushing to normalise abortion, the Principality poses an uncomfortable question: can a society call itself just when it refuses to protect those who cannot defend themselves?
The Prince’s decision recalls what Saint Paul VI affirmed with prophetic clarity in Humanae Vitae: “Human life is sacred; from its very beginning it involves the creative action of God.” And he insisted that “it is not permitted, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil so that good may result” (HV 14). The Monegasque case brings back into the public debate a crucial point that contemporary rhetoric often avoids: abortion is not about female emancipation or individual freedom, but about the dignity of the life that is about to begin. Prince Albert II’s refusal to legalise it reaffirms that a State can and must take responsibility for protecting the most vulnerableof human beings: the unborn child. And this not because of a confessional obligation, but out of a basic demand of civilisation.
d.V.M
Silere non possum