Baró admits Andorra cannot go further on abortion reform: “It is the minimum needed to preserve the Co-Principality”

The abortion reform promoted by Prime Minister Xavier Espot's government has opened a double political and institutional controversy in Andorra.

The proposal has failed to satisfy feminist organisations, which argue that abortion remains criminalised, while also raising concerns among pro-life groups that question the need to amend the Criminal Code and warn of potential tensions surrounding Andorra's episcopal Co-Principality.

Rather than achieving a broad political consensus, the government has placed the reform in particularly sensitive territory. It seeks to present the changes as progress for women's rights without undermining the country's constitutional arrangements, but has instead attracted criticism from opposing sides of the debate.

Ladislau Baró, Andorra's Minister of Institutional Relations, Education and Universities, has defended the proposal as “the minimum” necessary to reconcile the removal of criminal liability for women with the preservation of the Co-Principality.

However, this justification does not resolve the central political contradiction surrounding the reform: the government presents the legislation as a step towards decriminalising abortion while maintaining criminal penalties for healthcare professionals who perform the procedure.

Feminist organisations argue that abortion will remain a criminal offence in Andorra

The proposed amendment to Article 117 of Andorra's Criminal Code would eliminate criminal liability for women who voluntarily terminate their pregnancies.

Nevertheless, healthcare professionals who perform abortions in circumstances prohibited under Andorran law would continue to face prison sentences and professional disqualification of up to five years.

This approach has been rejected by Acció Feminista, which considers the reform insufficient because it does not eliminate the criminalisation of medical professionals involved in abortion procedures.

The organisation has already raised the possibility of pursuing a constitutional challenge and is demanding amendments during the parliamentary process.

Furthermore, the proposed legislation does not guarantee that Andorra's Social Security Fund (CASS) will cover voluntary abortions performed abroad, meaning women would continue to bear the financial costs themselves.

For feminist organisations, the result is legislation that removes direct criminal punishment from women but does not fully recognise access to abortion as a healthcare service.

Pro-life groups question the potential risks to Andorra's Co-Principality

At the opposite end of the debate, the initiative has also generated concerns among organisations and political representatives opposed to abortion.

These groups believe that changing the Criminal Code could unnecessarily strain relations with the episcopal institution.

Episcopal Co-Prince Josep Lluís Serrano, who also serves as Bishop of Urgell, represents an institution closely connected to the Catholic Church, whose official doctrine remains opposed to abortion.

The issue therefore extends beyond criminal legislation and directly affects the institutional balance underpinning Andorra's constitutional system, in which the French president and the Bishop of Urgell serve jointly as heads of state.

Against this background, the political party Andorra Endavant has expressed concerns about the episcopal Co-Prince's potential reaction.

Its leader, Carine Montaner, previously warned that a possible institutional confrontation could lead her party to vote against the reform.

The government's dilemma is that it is accepting the political consequences of modifying legislation on an issue particularly sensitive to the Catholic Church without simultaneously satisfying the organisations that have demanded abortion decriminalisation.

Baró acknowledges that the Vatican will not publicly endorse the reform

One of the most significant aspects of the controversy concerns the position of the Vatican and Andorra's episcopal Co-Prince.

Although the government has held discussions and negotiations with ecclesiastical representatives to develop a formula compatible with the continuation of the Co-Principality, Ladislau Baró has acknowledged that he does not expect explicit public approval from either Rome or the Bishopric of Urgell.

“We have no validation from Rome or from La Seu, nor do we expect it,” the minister stated.

Baró has defended this arrangement as part of the institutional balance necessary to advance a reform concerning an issue of particular sensitivity for the Catholic Church.

Consequently, the absence of public endorsement does not mean that the reform was developed without dialogue with ecclesiastical authorities. Rather, the government does not expect those authorities to openly express their approval.

The Executive presented the legislative proposal to the episcopal Co-Prince only a few hours before publicly announcing it, although the text had been preceded by discussions and negotiations concerning its scope and limitations.

One remaining question is whether Josep Lluís Serrano will address the issue during his traditional Christmas speech at the Episcopal Palace.

However, there is currently no confirmation that he intends to comment publicly on the reform.

Andorra's abortion reform leaves Espot's government politically exposed

The situation highlights the difficulties facing Xavier Espot's government as it attempts to reconcile demands for abortion decriminalisation with the preservation of Andorra's institutional system.

Feminist organisations argue that the government has not gone far enough, while pro-life representatives question whether it is necessary to risk tensions with the Co-Principality over a legislative amendment that does not satisfy those seeking broader abortion rights.

Baró's defence of the proposal as the minimum necessary to preserve the country's constitutional arrangements raises a further question: to what extent can a reform designed to avoid an institutional confrontation end up generating dissatisfaction on both sides of the debate?

The government must now defend the amendment before the Consell General, Andorra's parliament, despite the fact that it does not guarantee effective access to abortion, maintains criminal liability for healthcare professionals and, according to the Executive's own expectations, will not receive public endorsement from ecclesiastical authorities.

The proposed legislation therefore reflects Espot's attempt to reconcile two politically difficult objectives: advancing the decriminalisation of abortion while safeguarding Andorra's distinctive constitutional model.

For now, however, the compromise has failed to convince either those demanding comprehensive decriminalisation or those seeking to preserve the existing legal framework.

The central issue remains unresolved: women would no longer face criminal penalties for terminating a pregnancy, but medical professionals could still be imprisoned for performing the procedure in Andorra.

This distinction is likely to remain at the heart of the parliamentary debate over the future of abortion legislation and the constitutional limits of reform in the Principality.