What the inclusion of abortion in the Constitution changes

Ophélie Artaud / Photo credit: Mohamad Salaheldin Abdelg Alsaye / ANADOLU / Anadolu via AFP 6:00 p.m., February 29, 2024

A historic vote.

On Wednesday, the Senate largely voted in favor of including a “guaranteed freedom” for voluntary termination of pregnancy (abortion) in the Constitution, by 267 votes for and 50 against.

France will thus become the “first country in the world” to protect abortion in its fundamental text, as emphasized by the Minister of Justice, Éric Dupond-Moretti.

But what will this inclusion in the Constitution change?

Europe 1 takes stock.

>> READ ALSO -

 IVG in the Constitution: fist raised, feminist activists explode with joy in the Senate

This inscription is above all symbolic.

Its objective is to prevent any risk of an attempt to repeal the Veil law in the future, in the event of a government opposed to abortion coming to power, for example.

“By constitutionalizing, we are going to sanctify this access to abortion so as not to return to it,” explained Anne-Charlène Bezzina, lecturer in public law and constitutionalist, to Europe 1. “The only thing we want to constitutionalize , it is the idea that this right exists, it is the idea that women can have this freedom of access to abortion."

“Freedom” rather than “right”

As for the notion of "freedom", which prevailed over that of "right", it is explained by the fact that "freedom is a 'faculty of', it is a subjective notion, it is 'I can resort to'", explains the constitutionalist.

Freedom is therefore the idea of ​​saying that the woman can resort, if she wishes, to an interruption of pregnancy.

IVG is more regulated than a “right”, because its access also depends on the law in “its technical modalities”, underlined to Europe 1 Anne-Charlène Bezzina.

In other words, even if the Constitution will guarantee the freedom to resort to abortion, a government which opposes it could still make access more difficult by modifying the law.

Just as the Constitution could be amended again.

Moreover, this is the argument provided by the president of the Senate Gérard Larcher, the president of the Les Républicains group Bruno Retailleau and that of the centrist group Hervé Marseille to oppose the reform.

“I still have doubts about the effects of the qualification of guaranteed freedom,” regretted the LR president of the Law Commission François-Noël Buffet, who abstained.

“A guarantee is an obligation. Our fear is that creative jurisprudence could create an enforceable right,” feared Bruno Retailleau, who voted against.

Regardless, this vote is a "victory" for women's rights, as environmentalist senator Mélanie Vogel underlined.

The last step will take place this Monday: Congress will in turn meet to decide on this inclusion in the Constitution.