Slovakia’s parliament has approved a sweeping constitutional amendment that recognizes only two genders, restricts adoption rights to married couples, and asserts national sovereignty over European Union law on cultural and ethical matters. The controversial move, passed on September 26, 2025, has ignited fierce debate both within Slovakia and across Europe, with supporters hailing it as a defense of tradition and critics decrying it as a blow to human rights.
The amendment, drafted by Prime Minister Robert Fico’s government, required a three-fifths majority in the 150-seat National Council. It passed with 90 votes in favor and 7 against, with 12 conservative opposition lawmakers joining the ruling coalition to secure its passage, as reported by CNA and AP. The vote was described by Fico as a “historic opportunity to change the constitution.”
At the heart of the amendment is a provision that recognizes only two genders—male and female—defined at birth. The proposal explicitly states, “There are two sexes, male and female,” and asserts that “sex cannot be modified except for serious reasons, according to procedures that will be established by law.” This language echoes rhetoric used internationally by proponents of so-called traditional values, and it puts Slovakia at odds with evolving standards in other European Union countries, many of which have expanded legal recognition and protections for transgender and non-binary individuals.
But that’s not all. The amendment also makes it nearly impossible for anyone other than married couples to adopt children, allowing only rare exceptions. This builds on existing constitutional language—first introduced in 2014 during a previous Fico administration—defining marriage as “a unique union between a man and a woman.”
Other provisions bundled into the amendment require parental consent for minors to access sex education and guarantee equal pay for men and women. Justice Minister Boris Susko, addressing parliament, said the measures were designed to “promote traditional values.” According to CNA, Susko insisted that the changes would “boost traditional values” and reinforce Slovakia’s cultural identity.
The amendment further asserts Slovakia’s sovereignty in matters of “national identity,” especially in “fundamental cultural-ethical questions.” In practical terms, it declares that national law will take precedence over European Union law in these domains. This is a pointed rebuke to the EU, which has repeatedly clashed with member states over issues ranging from LGBTQ+ rights to judicial independence. As DW noted, the amendment states that Slovakia’s “sovereignty” regarding “cultural and ethical questions” should override EU law.
Prime Minister Fico, who returned to power in 2023, has often positioned himself as a defender of Slovakia’s traditions and a critic of what he calls “progressive politics.” In remarks following the amendment’s publication earlier this year, Fico invoked “the traditions, the cultural and spiritual heritage of our ancestors” and said the changes would construct “a constitutional barrier against progressive politics” and restore “common sense.”
Fico’s government has faced a series of protests and mounting criticism from both domestic and international observers. Human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, have condemned the amendment. In a strongly worded statement, Amnesty International said, “Today, the Slovak government chose to follow the lead of countries, such as Hungary, whose policies have led to an erosion of human rights.” The group warned that the amendment could breach Slovakia’s international obligations and undermine protections for LGBTQ+ people and other minorities.
Critics argue that the amendment’s language is vague, particularly in its references to “national identity” and “fundamental cultural-ethical questions.” These terms are not specifically defined, raising concerns about how they might be interpreted by courts or future governments. Legal experts have warned that the changes could open the door to discrimination and legal uncertainty, especially for transgender individuals and same-sex couples seeking parental rights.
The move also places Slovakia at odds with the broader trend in Europe, where many countries have moved to expand LGBTQ+ rights, legalize same-sex marriage, and recognize gender diversity. The European Union, for its part, has made clear that it expects member states to uphold fundamental human rights and non-discrimination. The assertion of national law over EU law in cultural and ethical matters is likely to set up further clashes between Bratislava and Brussels.
Supporters of the amendment, however, argue that it reflects the will of the Slovak people and protects the country’s cultural heritage. They point to the strong parliamentary majority and the participation of conservative opposition lawmakers as evidence of broad support. Justice Minister Susko and Prime Minister Fico have both framed the amendment as a defense against what they see as unwanted foreign influence and social engineering from Brussels.
“The amendment should promote traditional values,” Susko told parliament, echoing a sentiment that resonates with many Slovaks who feel that rapid social changes in Western Europe threaten their way of life. Fico, meanwhile, has repeatedly invoked the importance of “common sense” and “the traditions, the cultural and spiritual heritage of our ancestors.”
Yet, the international reaction has been swift and sharp. Human rights groups warn that the changes could have real consequences for vulnerable groups. The new adoption rules, for example, make it almost impossible for single individuals or unmarried couples—regardless of sexual orientation—to adopt children, a move critics argue could leave more children without families. The requirement for parental consent for access to sex education is also seen as a potential barrier to comprehensive sexual health information for young people.
Slovakia’s relationship with the European Union has grown increasingly fraught since Fico’s return to power. The government’s assertion that national law should override EU law on cultural and ethical matters is not without precedent—Hungary and Poland have made similar moves in recent years—but it is certain to provoke a response from EU institutions, which have legal mechanisms to challenge member states that violate core EU principles.
For now, the amendment stands as law, and its effects will be closely watched both in Slovakia and beyond. Whether it ushers in a new era of Slovak sovereignty and traditionalism, or triggers a prolonged legal and political battle with the European Union, remains to be seen. What’s clear is that the country has taken a decisive—and controversial—step that will shape its identity and its place in Europe for years to come.