One key change concerns the grounds on which a person may be evicted from a location. While the original draft referred to breaches of peace, security or cleanliness, this has now been narrowed to a single criterion: a disturbance of public order (trouble à l’ordre public). According to the government, this concept is more clearly defined through the Police Act and existing case law.
Another amendment removes the requirement for mayors to intervene directly. Under the revised procedure, police officers must first ask the person concerned to leave, then formally order them to do so, and may ultimately use force if the order is ignored. If a person fails to comply with an expulsion order on three occasions, a temporary ban from the area may be imposed. The previously planned fine has been dropped, keeping the process administrative in nature, and the duration of the ban has been reduced from 30 to 15 days.
Home Affairs Minister Léon Gloden insisted that these changes do not undermine the essence of the bill. The measure remains targeted and limited to specific incidents, he said. The Christian Social People’s Party (CSV) and Democratic Party (DP) continue to support the reinforced expulsion order proposal, with backing from the Alternative Democratic Reform Party (ADR). ADR MP Tom Weidig nevertheless raised questions about how the measure would be implemented in practice, noting the number of administrative steps involved, including written warnings, and pointing out that those affected are often vulnerable individuals. Pirate Party MP Marc Goergen described the revised proposal as a step in the right direction.
Opposition parties remain divided. The Luxembourg Socialist Workers’ Party (LSAP) considers the measure excessive, with MP Dan Biancalana announcing that his party would abstain. The Left and the Greens oppose the bill outright. Green MP Meris Sehovic, also a local councillor in the Esch-sur-Alzette municipality, said he would prefer increased police presence in his municipality rather than bans from public spaces. He argued that no other country applies such strict measures, noting that bans on entering or remaining in an area elsewhere are usually limited to serious criminal offences.
Responding to the criticism, Gloden said the notion of public order covers a wide range of situations. The Home Affairs Minister underlined the importance of respectful behaviour in public spaces. He cited examples such as public urination or uncontrolled dogs intimidating passers-by. Sehovic accused the minister of using a Trump-style approach by pushing overly repressive measures before scaling back. Gloden rejected the comparison, saying it reflected what he described as Green Party populism.
