The fate of Argentina’s abortion policy and the Omnibus Law
Following a parliamentary defeat, the administration signaled a pause on the so‑called Omnibus Law, at least temporarily. The far right, aiming to push sweeping reforms across Argentine life, has introduced a bill to the House of Representatives seeking the repeal of the law on voluntary termination of pregnancy. The proposal calls abortion a crime with penalties up to 15 years in prison.
In 2018, during Mauricio Macri’s right‑leaning government and amid strong social mobilization, lawmakers moved to legalize abortion. The Senate rejected the measure, but Law 27.610 was finally enacted in December 2020, amid the pandemic and under President Alberto Fernández, a Peronist. Mass demonstrations by feminist groups, widely known as the green wave, marked intense public debate. The rule faced vocal opposition from Catholic and Pentecostal communities in Buenos Aires and beyond.
With Javier Milei’s election to the presidency, calls to roll back the right to terminate pregnancy legally—up to 14 weeks—reappeared in the political discourse.
The platform of La Libertad Avanza included a 1921 reform that allowed abortion in cases of rape. The party’s proposal stipulates that a judge may exempt a woman from punishment based on the circumstances, her behavior, and the incident’s nature. It also argues for removing impunity in pregnancies resulting from rape, contending that previous interpretations treated the act as a justification for the procedure.
The ruling party pushed the bill on grounds that the country faces not only political and economic crises but a broader moral crisis. The draft, authored by Rocío Belén Bonacci, a Santa Fe state legislator, was endorsed by several party figures, including Lilia Lemoine, a Milei ally known for provocative public statements.
Under the proposed language, if a practitioner acts without the woman’s consent, penalties would range from imprisonment of three to ten years. If the act results in the woman’s death, penalties could rise to 15 years. If the woman consents to the procedure, penalties would be lighter, from one to four years.
Proponents describe the reform as a means to eliminate what they see as an unfair distinction between abortions carried out before the 14th week and those after, arguing that the existing legal framework creates dangerous categories of people.
Far‑right MPs argued in favor of a pro‑life stance, asserting that scientific understanding clarifies the beginning of human life at fertilization. They cited contemporary genetics to support the view that a new human entity arises at fertilization, distinct from its mother.
The fate of the Omnibus Law
In this climate, another official from the political sphere, Carlos D’Alessandro, expressed that the government might withdraw the Omnibus Law project. He suggested that certain articles could be returned to committee for reconsideration and stated that the executive branch did not plan to send new legislation that year, signaling the likelihood of an omnibus withdrawal.
The parliamentary setback drew anger from Milei, who was in Jerusalem when the measure failed. Milei, a vocal proponent of drastic reforms, criticized lawmakers who blocked the initiative, describing what he called a political caste that resists change and benefits from old arrangements. He framed the situation as a struggle over Argentina’s future and its economic governance, arguing that the current mechanisms hamper progress.