The Crime of Abortion under Lebanese and French Law

Abstract

This research examines the crime of abortion under both Lebanese criminal law and French criminal law through a comparative analytical approach, with the aim of clarifying each legal system’s position on abortion in light of the inherent conflict between a woman’s right to privacy and bodily autonomy, and the fetus’s right to life. The study is grounded in a central research question concerning the extent to which Lebanese and French legislation are capable of achieving a fair balance between these competing rights, particularly in view of contemporary social, medical, and human rights developments.

The research demonstrates that the Lebanese legislator continues to adopt a predominantly punitive approach, criminalizing abortion in most cases, with narrowly defined exceptions that lack clarity and sufficient procedural safeguards for women. This reflects the predominance of moral and religious considerations at the expense of individual rights. In contrast, French law reveals significant legal evolution, having moved from criminalization to conditional legalization, and ultimately to the recognition of abortion as a woman’s right, subject to specific temporal, medical, and legal regulations.

The study concludes that French legislation has been relatively successful in achieving a balance between the protection of the fetus and the safeguarding of women’s freedom and dignity, whereas the Lebanese legal framework suffers from legislative and philosophical shortcomings that prevent it from keeping pace with international human rights standards. Accordingly, the research recommends a reconsideration of Lebanese criminal policy on abortion through a rights-based and humanitarian approach that protects women without negating the right to life, and that establishes a clear and balanced legal framework.