In this first part of Patrick Laure’s new series, he writes a personal reflection and examines how Monaco’s unique constitutional ties to religion continue to shape its justice system and social choices, raising deeper questions about faith, law, and a woman’s right to decide her own destiny…

While I was sitting on a bench, public bench, in the courtroom of the Monaco Court of Appeal, I saw my Parisian lawyer turn towards me, ready to launch into his eloquent plea, but the look he gave me conveyed something other than the subject of his upcoming plea.

As we waited for the prosecution, who were taking their time, he seized the opportunity to talk about it and explain the look he had given me a little earlier. Leaning over to his Monegasque colleague, he asked him a question, almost shyly: “There is a cross of Christ above the magistrates’ seats, which is surprising. What is its meaning?” His colleague replied naturally, “Religion is the state religion in Monaco. Justice is administered by men, but under the gaze of God.”

Laws and ordinances, meanwhile, are enacted “by the grace of God” under a princely signature.

The situation is clear, the tone is set. In Monaco, religion is the state religion, the Principality of Monaco is constitutionally a concordat under the administration of the Holy See, and institutionally administered by a secular, not to say pagan, government. The die is cast.

I am reminded of the contemporary story of a French judge who appeared on the programme “Pièces à Conviction”, where his first words were: “French magistrates are trained in secularism“, implying that in Monaco there was a difficulty that conflicted with his professional training. Yet no one was forcing him to come and practise his profession in the Principality of Monaco.

Another one who doesn’t know who he is, I thought, and when it comes to justice, a judge who doesn’t know who he is, is an additional difficulty for the defendant, adding to the unpleasant prospect of finding oneself before the justice of men.

Human justice, divine justice, immanent justice, a singular reminder of the religious trinity, the existential trilogy… it’s complicated.

“I embrace all religious causes for fear of ending up in hell through negligence,” said someone I can’t remember, and I agree, it’s already simpler.

However, I thought the subject remained serious. A gentle blend of morality, law and religion should not give way to syncretism, even if Balzac wrote that “religion means nothing“.

Of the few etymological interpretations of the word ‘religion’ (religare), the idea of connecting, (relegere), the idea of gathering, and (religio), the idea of scruples, with the guilt-inducing obligations attached to it, the one that seems most accurate remains that of contemplation.

Cicero was undoubtedly right: the word “religion” comes from delegere, the opposite of which is neglegere. And in this case, it is a question of not neglecting women, the source of life.

Thinking back to “Pièces à convictions”, given that these were the first words of this visibly tormented judge, I took the opportunity to switch to another channel, avoiding the upcoming discrepancy between the comments made in the introduction to the programme in which he was the star.

And if I was going to switch channels, or even turn off the telly, why not dive back into reading Amélie Nothomb’s “Acide sulfurique” (Sulphuric Acid), an incredible distillation of Frederic Nietzche’s “Beyond Good and Evil“.

We celebrated the 120th anniversary of the law on secularism, and without any proselytism, there is nothing more religious than the 1905 law on secularism, a little as if we were all, democrats or reactionaries that we are, atheists by the grace of God, but that is another subject than the one set out in this article.

A few months earlier, on the rock, not the Tarpeian Rock, but the Prince’s Palace, I met a young man with a frank smile and blue eyes as clear as the depths of an exotic sea.

I would later learn that he is the grandson of Simone Veil, scientifically proven by the logical material of mathematical sciences, atavism and a scientific reality that imposes itself at the dawn of our individual creation.

Here we are, religions, dogmas, concordats, Monaco, abortion is still banned.

Yet Madame Simone Veil, with delicacy, intelligence and the humanity befitting the truly oppressed, had overcome the foolish blindness of men, without a capital “H”; every woman has the right to her destiny, with dignity and respect for her existence, especially when it comes to creation, in the love of Christ, according to God, in love itself, let us hope.

The vote against abortion that the Principality of Monaco has had to endure is a rearguard action, but let us hope that it will be won in time, for good things take time.

This, in summary, is what was recently presented and defended before the National Council of Monaco, with the same delicacy and human intelligence as Madame Simone Veil, embellished with Christian love, where this religion is the state religion, by a member of parliament from the Principality of Monaco, whose name I will not mention, noblesse oblige.

In all matters, but even more so in religion, fixed ideas are to individuals what prejudices are to the community.

The rejection of the vote for the right to abortion in Monaco is, from a secular point of view, an equation with no unknowns, if not a dogmatic position on the part of the Principality of Monaco, simply induced by its status of concordat with the Holy See, and nothing else.

The rejection of the vote for the right to abortion in Monaco is, from a religious point of view, an equation with one unknown, always the same unknown: God and the belief in his existence that humans place in him.

In reality, the Monegasque government’s refusal to allow access to abortion can be explained by its concordat status, whereby Monaco is constitutionally bound to the Holy See, rather than by a princely stance. If we are to discuss this refusal to allow access to a fundamental right, we might as well address God rather than his saints.

For clearly, contrary to what the Monegasque lawyer had stated in response to his Parisian colleague’s question, specifically and solely concerning the subject of abortion in Monaco and the surprising position of the Higher Committee for Legal Studies that followed, the answer should rather be: “Religion is the state religion in Monaco, justice is administered by God, through the dynamic secular arm of man.“

The lowest common denominator, whether secular, pagan, mathematical or religious, on the subject of abortion is a woman’s perfume.

Abortion raises the existential question: where do children come from? In other words, where do we come from? Who has the right of life or death over the foetus of a life in the making? This is the battle between those who defend a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body and those who defend life and the rights of the foetus. The Tremblay v. Daigle case in 1989 determined the scope of these respective rights.

If we are made in God’s image, He nevertheless has the extraordinary power of common law not to have a mother, which makes things easier for Him.

As for us poor sinners, he leaves us to deal with an inextricable problem, that of Mary’s love, giving birth by the grace of God to a merciful Jesus, a concentration of love that sets the bar so high for our simple lives.

The love of life, because life is beautiful, as Roberto Benigni reminded us, has its source in childbirth, so it is exclusively a woman’s business.

Love therefore seems inseparable from the scent of a woman. Yet it is by tasting the forbidden fruit that God condemns the woman, Eve, from the outset, thus unwittingly opening the door to Sartrean existentialism.

Nietzsche said that God is dead, Luc Ferry that man killed God, and of the two I prefer Odon Vallet’s nuance: God is not dead… but he is a little ill. It seems that the truth lies in the nuance.

The history of abortion dates back to antiquity, after Adam and Eve, but before Jesus, and it must be said that since then, but also during most of the 20th and 21st centuries, abortion has still been carried out in the moral throes of religious prohibition, or rather spiritual throes, with men as the only opponents, too often preaching good feelings that they cannot feel, except through imposture.

Patrick LAURE
Secrétaire Particulier
+33 6 35 45 27 02
laurepatrick@wanadoo.fr

**The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and regulations vary by jurisdiction and may change over time. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional for advice specific to their situation. The author and publisher are not responsible for any actions taken based on this information.