The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is a small landlocked country in northwest Europe bordered by Belgium, France and Germany. Its modern-day borders were agreed in 1839 and it finally regained independence from its neighbors in 1867, although it was occupied by Germany during both world wars. The country’s economy historically grew from steel manufacturing, but today Luxembourg is recognized as one of Europe’s strongest financial centres and a founding member of several international organizations – including the European Union and NATO.
Luxembourg is a constitutional monarchy and executive power technically lies with the Grand Duke of Luxembourg, who appoints the Prime Minister. In reality the powers of the Grand Duke are largely symbolic and executive power lies with the Prime Minister and his ministerial cabinet. The cabinet answers to the Chamber of Deputies, who are elected to five-year terms by popular vote.
According to Government regulations on the use of personal data in information processing, the national statistics office does not have the right to ask questions about religious, political and philosophical affiliation and trade-union membership in population censuses from 1981 onwards. As such there are no official and reliable statistics on religious affiliation in Luxembourg. However, according to a survey from 2022 commissioned by the Alliance of Humanists, Atheists and Agnostics Luxembourg (AHA Lëtzebuerg) and conducted by TNS ILres, 51% of residents self-identify as “non-religious”, although approximately 59% considered themselves as “belonging to a religion” (53% adhering to Catholicism, 2% to Protestantism, 3% to Islam, 3% other). 41% of those surveyed “do not belong to a religion” (23% having quit religion and 18% having never belonged to a religion).
| Constitution and government |
Education and children’s rights |
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals |
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Constitution and government
Education and children’s rights
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Countries: Belgium, Brazil, Central African Republic, Congo, Republic of the, Ecuador, Estonia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Japan, Kosovo, Mongolia, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, São Tomé and Príncipe, Slovenia, South Africa, South Sudan, Suriname, Taiwan, Ukraine
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Croatia, Egypt, Eswatini, Ghana, Iran, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
No formal discrimination in education
Countries: Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Congo, Republic of the, Czech Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, France, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iceland, India, Japan, Korea, Republic of, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mali, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Russia, São Tomé and Príncipe, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Sweden, Taiwan, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Uruguay
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
No religious tribunals of concern, secular groups operate freely, individuals are not persecuted by the state
Countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, Congo, Republic of the, Czech Republic, Dominica, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Ghana, Guatemala, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Republic of, Kosovo, Latvia, Luxembourg, Mongolia, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, São Tomé and Príncipe, Slovenia, Sweden, Taiwan, Uruguay, Venezuela
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
No fundamental restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy of humanist values
Countries: Bahamas, Belgium, Czech Republic, Iceland, Jamaica, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition
Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious
This condition is unusual in that it is applied in cases where there is some social discrimination, but it is not pervasive or nationwide. This condition is applied when there is sufficient background evidence to warrant the assertion that discrimination is not anomalous but widespread, and this condition may be applied for example even where if there is no legislative discrimination or where the non-religious may have legal recourse against such discrimination. However, societal discrimination (i.e. discrimination by peers, as opposed to state or legal discrimination) is not easily measured, and for this reason the Report does not currently have similar more severe boundary conditions to capture higher levels of social discrimination per se. In principle these may be introduced in future. However, we consider that countries with actual higher levels of social discrimination against the non-religious will generally already meet other higher level (more severe) boundary conditions under this thematic strand.
The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination
Applied when the influence of religion on public life undermines others' rights, such as SRHR, women's rights, LGBTI+ rights.
May be applied when the influence is overt (i.e. when religious laws are applied to undermine others' rights) or covert (i.e. where religious pressure groups exert influence to affect policy)
Countries: Albania, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Chile, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Eswatini, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Hungary, Iran, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Liberia, Lithuania, Malawi, Mali, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Zambia
Use of Conscientious Objection clauses resulting in the denial of lawful services to women and LGBTI+ people
Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of expression and thought, religion or belief
Applied when overriding acts of oppression by the State are extreme, to the extent that the question of freedom of thought and expression is almost redundant, because all human rights and freedoms are quashed by authorities.
The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
Countries: Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, Eritrea, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
There is systematic religious privilege
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Belize, Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malta, Moldova, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United States of America, Vanuatu, Zambia, Zimbabwe
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment
Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Countries: Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Comoros, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Denmark, Dominica, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Kosovo, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Morocco, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Switzerland, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United States of America, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe
State-funded schools offer religious or ideological instruction with no secular or humanist alternative, but it is optional
Countries: Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Italy, Kiribati, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Moldova, Monaco, New Zealand, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Tanzania, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela
Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence
The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
Countries: Algeria, Bangladesh, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Nigeria, Oman, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Turkey
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Countries: Barbados, Colombia, Egypt, Ghana, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Malta, Poland, Samoa, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Uganda
Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
Countries: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, Chad, China, Eritrea, Iran, Mauritania, Myanmar (Burma), North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is severely restricted
Countries: Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brazil, Burundi, Central African Republic, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Guinea, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Laos, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Morocco, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Philippines, Russia, Rwanda, Samoa, Somalia, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is somewhat restricted
Countries: Andorra, Armenia, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Congo, Republic of the, Côte d'Ivoire, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mexico, Mozambique, Niger, Paraguay, Poland, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, United States of America
Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious
Countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Austria, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, Dominica, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, France, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, India, Ireland, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Korea, Republic of, Kosovo, Kuwait, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tonga, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Zambia
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state
State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Countries: Algeria, Bangladesh, Comoros, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general
This condition is applied where there are miscellaneous indicators that organs of the state offer various forms of support for a religion, or to religion in general over non-religious worldviews, suggesting a preference for those beliefs, or that the organs of that religion are privileged.
Countries: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Zimbabwe
Official symbolic deference to religion
Countries: Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Croatia, Cyprus, Djibouti, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, Finland, Germany, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Kiribati, Korea, Republic of, Laos, Latvia, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Moldova, Monaco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Singapore, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States of America, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe
Religious or ideological instruction in a significant number of schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety
This condition highlights countries where schools subject children to fundamentalist religious instruction with no real opportunity to question fundamentalist tenets, or where lessons routinely encourage hatred (for example religious or ethnic hatred). The wording "significant number of schools" is not given a rigid quantification (sometimes the worst-offending schools are unregistered, illegal, or otherwise uncounted); however the condition is not applied in cases where only a small number of schools meet the description and may be anomalous, as opposed to being indicative of a widespread problem.
Religious schools have powers to discriminate in admissions or employment
Countries: Argentina, Armenia, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Equatorial Guinea, Finland, Germany, Haiti, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Sri Lanka, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States of America, Zimbabwe
State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the non-religious
Systemic religious privilege results in significant social discrimination
Countries: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ghana, Guinea, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Oman, Palestine, Paraguay, Qatar, Russia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zimbabwe
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
Countries: Comoros, Egypt, Haiti, Jamaica, Lebanon, Malaysia, Nigeria, Palestine, Philippines, Singapore, Turkey
‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Countries: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence
Blasphemy or criticism of religion is restricted in law and is punishable by a fine
Countries: Australia, Austria, Barbados, Brazil, Cambodia, Finland, Italy, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Moldova, Montenegro, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Saint Lucia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Kingdom
Concerns that secular or religious authorities interfere in specifically religious freedoms
Countries: Angola, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cameroon, China, Congo, Republic of the, Denmark, Ethiopia, Germany, Ghana, Haiti, Hungary, Italy, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Malaysia, Mauritania, Mexico, Nepal, North Korea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Singapore, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, Venezuela, Viet Nam
State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Countries: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
There is an established church or state religion
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Finland, Georgia, Haiti, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritania, Monaco, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Yemen, Zambia
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Countries: Cameroon, Dominica, Ethiopia, France, Ghana, Guinea, India, Jamaica, Malaysia, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Switzerland, Thailand, Tonga, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Countries: Argentina, Armenia, Belize, Cambodia, Chad, China, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Germany, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Jamaica, Jordan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Lesotho, Libya, Malawi, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Palestine, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, Switzerland, Thailand, Uganda, United Kingdom
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
Countries: Afghanistan, Egypt, Hungary, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, China, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Russia, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Slovakia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zimbabwe
Discriminatory prominence is given to religious bodies, traditions or leaders
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Grenada, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kiribati, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Micronesia, Moldova, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Qatar, Romania, Samoa, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tonga, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion (including de facto ‘blasphemy’ laws) is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Comoros, Cyprus, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Grenada, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Oman, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, São Tomé and Príncipe, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced, or a single-party regime holds uncontested power, subject to severe punishment
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of religion or belief
Countries: Argentina, Burundi, Canada, Eritrea, Haiti, Jordan, Lebanon, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Tonga
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities
Countries: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Maldives, Morocco, North Korea, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans)
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Djibouti, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Religious groups control some public or social services
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Denmark, Germany, Haiti, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Lebanon, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Solomon Islands, Switzerland, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United States of America
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
Countries: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Maldives, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
Countries: Argentina, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Haiti, Hungary, Italy, Pakistan, Peru, Rwanda, Samoa, Sweden, Switzerland
Religious control over family law or legislation on moral matters
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
Countries: Comoros, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Maldives, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, United Arab Emirates
Some concerns about children's right to specifically freedom of religion or belief
This condition may apply if specifically religious education, religious materials, or specific religious denominations are so tightly controlled that children are in fact over-protected from exposure to religion and are likely unable to explore or construct their own worldview in accordance with their evolving capacities. This condition helps us to classify states (perhaps with secular constitutions) which have criminalized specifically religious beliefs or practices. This condition is not applied if the restricted beliefs or practices are found to be outlawed due to their being of an extremist variety. While this condition does not directly reflect discrimination against non-religious persons or non-religious ideas, it does represent an overall threat to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; such restrictions could spill over to affect non-religious beliefs later; and they pose a risk of backlash against over-zealous secular authorities or even against non-religious individuals by association.
Countries: China, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Cuba, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guyana, Italy, Kazakhstan, Laos, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, North Macedonia, Romania, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bhutan, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Eswatini, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Korea, Republic of, Latvia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Montenegro, Myanmar (Burma), Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, North Macedonia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Suriname, Switzerland, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
Countries: Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Egypt, Eritrea, Georgia, Malaysia, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Senegal, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan
| Systemic Discrimination |
| Free and Equal |
Constitution and government
Constitutional guarantees
Luxembourg’s Constitution (revised in 2023) protects freedom of thought, religion or belief (FoRB). Under Article 14, it is stated that “everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion”. Article 24 of the Constitution guarantees:
“The freedom to manifest one’s philosophical or religious beliefs, and the freedom to adhere, or not to adhere, to a religion, are guaranteed, except for offenses committed in the exercise of these freedoms.
Freedom of worship and the freedom to practice it are guaranteed, except for offenses committed in the exercise of these freedoms.
No one may be compelled to participate in any way in the acts and ceremonies of a religion or to observe its days of rest.”
There is no state religion and the secular nature of the state is guaranteed under Article 120:
“Churches and religious communities are separate from the state.
The law regulates relations between the state and churches and religious communities.
Within the limits and measures determined by law, agreements to be approved by the Chamber of Deputies may specify the relations between the state and churches and religious communities.”
Recognition & registration of belief groups
Luxembourg operates a selective recognition model and has established conventions with a number of religious communities which, despite the Constitution’s declared secularism, include state funding. In January 2015, the government reached an overarching agreement to reorganize relations and public funding with several religious communities – Catholic, Protestant, Reformed, Anglican, Orthodox, and Jewish – as well as to extend recognition and funding to the Muslim community (Shoura) for the first time. These conventions have led to the restructure of the Catholic Church’s historic bodies – as exemplified by the creation of a fund to manage religious buildings – demonstrating a shift from direct salary payments to institutional funding. Parliament approved the relevant conventions between July 2015–July 2016 and groups that do not have a convention – such as the New Apostolic Church and the Bahá’ís – may operate freely, but do not receive state funding.
Religious privilege within government
The Prime Minister traditionally holds the portfolio of Minister of Religious Affairs and signs and oversees the conventions – acting as the institutional channel for religious affairs within government. Conventions confer public-law status and budgetary support to selected religions, plus arrangements for chaplaincy and representation. Non-recognized world-view groups – such as humanist associations – register under the general law on non-profit associations and foundations without equivalent public privileges or funding.
Religious taxes
Unlike some of its neighbors, Luxembourg does not levy a church tax. Historically, support has come from the state budget and since 2015, lump-sum public funding is allocated via the conventions rather than individual clergy salaries. A church-tax was floated in 2014 but was not adopted.
Education and children’s rights
Curriculum & religious education
Public schools no longer offer confessional religious education. From 2016 (secondary) and 2017 (primary) the state introduced a common, compulsory, non-confessional subject “Vie et société / Leben & Gesellschaft (VIESO)” that has replaced both religious instruction and education about ethics and morals. The course is framed around citizenship, critical thinking, and social competencies. The Ministry of Education, Youth and Childhood (MENJE) regularly publishes the framework and materials.
Collective worship in schools
There is no legal requirement for collective worship in public schools. A ministerial circular in 2014 reiterates the religious neutrality of public education, restricts staff from proselytizing, and protects pupils’ individual expression within school rules.
Funding for religious schools
Luxembourg recognizes private schools that follow national curricula on a contractual basis. These institutions, including several Catholic schools, receive state contributions under the Law of 13 June 2003 on relations between the State and private education, as well as through related legal instruments. Examples include the self-described Catholic schools, École Privée Fieldgen and École Privée Sainte-Anne, which operate under contract. By contrast, private international schools that fall outside the contract do not receive subsidies or routine pedagogical inspection.
In employment and admissions, EU Directive 2000/78/EC (found in the Law of 28 Nov 2006) prohibits discrimination on grounds including religion or belief. “Genuine and determining occupational requirement” exceptions can apply – such as for positions related to a specific ethos. However, any difference of treatment must be objective, proportionate, and legitimate. Overall, contract schools are bound by equality norms and there is no blanket exemption permitting faith-based discrimination during staffing or pupil selection.
Family, community & society
Luxembourg is broadly tolerant and increasingly non-religious in everyday culture. A 2022 survey by the Humanists, Atheists and Agnostics Alliance found a slight majority (51%) identify as non-religious, with very high endorsement of broadly humanist values (freedom of expression, equality, secularism). While the sample is modest, the trend aligns with long-term secularization and the legal neutrality of public institutions.
International monitoring reports no pattern of societal harassment against the non-religious and documents largely cooperative state–religion relations under the convention system. The government presents itself as a neutral guarantor of FoRB.
Religious minorities (Jewish, Muslim, Orthodox, etc.) participate in the convention framework and are generally free to worship. The government adopted a comprehensive National Action Plan to Combat Antisemitism (2023) that spans education, victim support, and data collection – an explicit acknowledgement of risk factors even in a relatively safe environment.
Women’s rights
In 2024, a parliamentary initiative proposed amending Luxembourg’s Constitution to explicitly guarantee the right to abortion y and the right to contraception, with the law determining conditions for “free and effective access” to these rights. The Council of State, in a July 2025 opinion, welcomed the proposal. They noted that while it would not fundamentally alter existing abortion law, it would provide more durable legal protection against potential future regressions. Civil society organizations such as Planning Familial and the Consultative Commission on Human Rights have strongly supported constitutional enshrinement, and public demonstrations have called on Parliament to act. Political reactions have been largely positive, while the Catholic Church has been firmly opposed to the initiative. The proposal reflects a broader European trend — exemplified by France’s 2024 constitutional amendment — to safeguard reproductive rights at the highest legal level against shifting political or ideological pressures.
Luxembourg permits abortion on request up to 12 weeks of pregnancy In July 2025, Parliament abolished the mandatory 3-day reflection period, removing a symbolic and logistical barrier to timely care. Conscientious objection among individual doctors persists in practice, but objectors must refer the patient to a willing provider.
Harmful traditional practices
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is explicitly criminalized in Article 409 of the Penal Code and child marriage is not permitted under Article 144 of Luxembourg’s Civil Code.
As of March 2025, in line with World Health Organization recommendations, the Luxembourg government declared its intention to prohibit virginity testing and certificates, and also to ban hymenoplasty (a surgical procedure to “restore” the hymen). A draft law has been approved (by the Government Council) that would criminalize “all virginity testing procedures and certificate issuance” and make “attempts to perform or arrange a virginity test or hymenoplasty” punishable offences. The proposal also includes amendments to the Criminal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure and new schemes for prosecuting offences even when committed abroad.
LGBTI+ rights
Luxembourg ranks among Europe’s more protective jurisdictions. Same-sex marriage and joint adoption have been legal since 2015 and anti-discrimination protections on sexual orientation (and legal gender change without surgical requirements) are established in law and practice. The government announced in 2025 that it would introduce a law to ban “conversion therapy”, as part of an updated national action plan.
Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values
Freedom of expression is broadly respected in law and practice. According to Reporters Without Borders (RSF), journalists in Luxembourg operate in a generally safe environment.
Luxembourg retains criminal defamation provisions in the Penal Code. While the provisions are seldom used against public-interest journalism, they remain a potential constraint. The United Nations (UN) have recommended that Luxembourg decriminalize defamation and the Council of Europe has urged all member states to review and amend defamation laws to align with the European Court of Human Rights.
No “blasphemy” offence exists in Luxembourg law. However, hate-speech and discrimination provisions cover religion among protected characteristics, and anti-religious statements may be punishable when they meet statutory thresholds – such as incitement and insults targeting protected groups. Recent updates strengthened penalties for crimes motivated by factors listed in Criminal Code Article 454 (including religion).
Freedom of assembly and association
Constitutional guarantees protect peaceful assembly and civil society operates freely. Humanist or atheist groups may register as non-profit associations. A major reform—the Law of 7 Aug 2023 (as amended 4 Dec 2024) —modernized and simplified the procedure, further easing restrictions on freedom of association. However, prior authorization is required for demonstrations organized in open-air, public spaces. The UN Human Rights Committee has recommended that Luxembourg should lift this ban on demonstrations that have not been notified in advance.
Advocating for humanist values
The Alliance of Humanists, Atheists and Agnostics Luxembourg, via its President, is invited to regularly share its views on current societal issues on two national radio stations (“Carte Blanche” on RTL Radio Lëtzebuerg and “Fräie Mikro” on Radio 100,7) and it has a monthly 1 hour radio show (“Iwwer Gott an d’Welt”) on the community media radio station RADIO ARA.
Testimonies
As an atheist in Luxembourg, I can live my life openly without fear of persecution or legal disadvantage. I do not have to hide my worldview at work, in public, or among friends. Most people are respectful, and many are themselves non-religious — even if they still identify culturally as Catholic. Conversations about religion and belief are generally calm and pragmatic rather than hostile. I do not face harassment from the state, and I can form associations or speak publicly about humanism without obstacles.
That said, traces of the country’s Catholic heritage are still woven into public life. Major public holidays follow the Christian calendar, religious symbols sometimes appear in official ceremonies, and political leaders often attend church events. These practices rarely feel oppressive, but they are reminders that religious traditions still enjoy a kind of “default” status. Occasionally I encounter assumptions — for example, that everyone celebrates religious holidays, or that children should take part in certain religious rituals — but declining is usually accepted without issue.
In everyday life, then, being an atheist in Luxembourg is easy and unremarkable. I can speak freely, raise my children without religious instruction, and advocate for secularism in public debate. If anything, the remaining challenges are subtle: not legal discrimination, but the persistence of habits and symbols that still give religion a privileged place in public life.
– Anonymous, October 2025