Slovenia Votes Against Assisted Dying Law in Referendum

Slovenia’s recent referendum resulted in the rejection of a law permitting assisted dying for terminally ill patients. Preliminary results indicate that approximately 53% of voters opposed the legislation, while around 46% supported it. The turnout for the referendum was nearly 41%, with the no-votes exceeding 20% of the 1.7 million eligible voters in the country, as reported by the State Electoral Commission.

The outcome has immediate implications, suspending the existing law that had been passed by Parliament in July 2023. The legislation aimed to allow mentally competent individuals facing terminal conditions or unbearable pain to choose assisted dying, under strict conditions involving approvals from two doctors and a consultation period. Notably, this law did not extend to individuals with mental illnesses.

Divided Opinions on Dignity and Care

Ales Primc, a conservative activist leading the campaign against the law, proclaimed, “Compassion has won.” He emphasized that Slovenia has rejected what he termed the government’s reform based on “death by poisoning.” The vote was a response to a nonbinding referendum held last year, where the public initially expressed support for assisted dying. Primc and his allies successfully called for a new vote by gathering over 40,000 signatures.

In contrast, advocates of assisted dying expressed disappointment but remained hopeful for future legislative efforts. Prime Minister Robert Golob acknowledged the rejection of the current bill but pointed out that the underlying challenge remains. He stated, “This is not a political issue; it has always been a matter of dignity, human rights, and individual choice.”

Supporters of the legislation, including Golob’s liberal government, argued that the law would provide individuals with the opportunity to end their suffering on their own terms, promoting dignity in death.

Opposition Voices and Broader Context

Opposition to the law came from various groups, including conservative factions, some medical associations, and the Catholic Church. These opponents contended that the legislation violated Slovenia’s constitution and argued for improved palliative care instead.

President Natasa Pirc Musar emphasized the importance of civic engagement, stating that it is crucial for citizens to express their opinions on significant issues, not just during elections. She remarked, “It is right for us as individuals to say what we think about a certain topic.”

Slovenia’s decision echoes a broader conversation occurring across Europe, with several countries, including neighbouring Austria, having already enacted similar laws. The outcome of this referendum reflects the complex and often controversial discussions surrounding assisted dying, human rights, and the role of government in personal health decisions.