section_path: Reign/Euthanasia and constitutional reform controversies
section_name: Euthanasia and constitutional reform controversies
paragraph_text: Euthanasia and constitutional reform controversies
  
  On 2 December 2008, it was announced that Grand Duke Henri had stated he would refuse to give his assent to a new law on euthanasia that had been passed earlier in the year by the Chamber of Deputies. Under the constitution then, the grand duke "sanctions and promulgates the laws" meaning the need for the grand duke's sanction or approval was required in order for laws to take effect. In the absence of clarity on the long-term implications for the constitutional position of the grand duke posed by such a refusal, it was announced by Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker that a constitutional amendment would be brought forward.
  
  The Luxembourg ruling house had tried to block a decision by Parliament only once before, when Grand Duchess Marie-Adélaïde refused to sign a bill in 1912 to reduce the role of Roman Catholic priests within the education system. The ultimate solution was that the grand duke would be declared unable to perform his duty temporarily. This was similar to the "escape route" provided to his uncle King Baudouin of Belgium when he refused to sign an abortion law in 1991; thus the law could take effect without the signature of the grand duke, but also without the need to enact far-reaching changes in the constitution.
  
  Article 34 of the constitution was subsequently amended to remove the term "assent", leaving the relevant provision to read: "The Grand Duke promulgates the laws..." As a result, his signature is still needed but it is clear that his signature is automatic and that he has no freedom of decision. The head of state no longer has to "sanction" laws for them to take effect, as the officeholder merely promulgates them.