06 June 2025
CHD ¦ Bill 8368 Completes Luxembourg's Transposition of the EU Terrorism Directive
Luxembourg closes the gaps the Commission found in its terrorism law
Bill 8368 finishes a job Luxembourg thought it had already done. The law of 3 March 2020 was meant to transpose Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism, but in a reasoned opinion of 19 April 2023 the European Commission concluded that four of its provisions had not been transposed correctly. The bill answers with three new offences in the Criminal Code and one addition to the law on judicial organisation. The Chamber of Deputies adopted it on 23 January 2025 with 58 votes in favour, two abstentions and none against, and the Council of State waived the second constitutional vote on 4 February 2025.
What the Commission objected to
The complaint concerned Article 3(1)(f), (g) and (j) of the directive and Article 24(2). The first three require member states to treat certain acts as terrorist offences when they are committed with a terrorist aim: the manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of explosives or weapons, including chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons, together with research into and development of such weapons; the release of dangerous substances or the causing of fires, floods or explosions that endanger human life; and the threat to commit any of the listed terrorist acts. Article 24(2) requires support services for victims of terrorism that are available immediately after an attack and for as long as necessary.
Luxembourg had argued that its existing provisions already covered these cases. For threats, it relied on Article 66 of the Criminal Code on co-perpetration and Article 327 on threats of attack. The Commission found that Article 66 reached a threat only if the offence was actually committed, and that a threat made without an order or condition carried at most two years under Article 327 – too little for the three-year threshold in Article 135-1, which defines a terrorist act. For explosives and weapons, Article 135-9 applied only to attacks on specific targets such as public places, government facilities, public transport and infrastructure. Article 135-14 covered possession or acquisition only as preparation for another offence, and only together with at least one further material act. Articles 510 and 520 on arson and explosions were likewise tied to particular buildings and places.
Threatening a terrorist act becomes a stand-alone offence
New Article 135-2bis punishes anyone who threatens to commit an act of terrorism within the meaning of Article 135-1, whether or not the threat comes with an order or condition and whether or not any act follows. The government’s draft set the penalty at six months to five years, copying the general offence in Article 327. The Council of State formally objected. Article 15(3) of the directive requires a maximum of at least eight years where the threat comes from the leader of a terrorist group, and Article 15(2) requires terrorist offences to carry heavier custodial sentences than the same conduct without the terrorist aim.
The Council of State proposed a separate eight-year maximum for leaders of terrorist groups. The Justice Committee chose a simpler route and raised the penalty for everyone to one to eight years’ imprisonment and a fine of €2,500 to €12,500. The fine range was aligned with Article 135-17, which covers offences linked to terrorist activities. The Council of State accepted this as consistent with the directive and lifted its objection.
Dangerous substances, fires, floods and explosions
New Article 135-10bis makes it a terrorist offence for anyone to release dangerous substances or to cause fires, floods or explosions with a terrorist aim where this endangers human life. Unlike Article 135-9, it is not limited to particular places or installations. The draft provided for five to ten years’ imprisonment, with heavier penalties where the act caused injury, permanent harm or death.
The Public Prosecutor General and the Council of State both found this too low. Arson and explosions in inhabited places under Articles 510 and 520 already carry fifteen to twenty years without any terrorist aim, so the draft would have punished the terrorist version less severely than the ordinary offence. The Council of State formally objected. The final text sets twenty to thirty years, and life imprisonment where the act causes a death. The intermediate aggravations for injury were dropped as no longer needed.
Weapons and explosives with a terrorist aim
The third offence moved during the procedure. The draft placed the manufacture, possession and use of explosives and weapons in Article 135-10bis, among the provisions on terrorist bombings. The Public Prosecutor General argued that the conduct is preparatory and belongs next to Article 135-14, and the final text therefore creates Article 135-14bis. It punishes anyone who manufactures, possesses, acquires, transports, supplies or uses explosives, firearms or other weapons or harmful or dangerous substances, including chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons, or who carries out research into and development of such weapons, if this is done with a terrorist aim. The penalties are those of Article 135-17, as for Article 135-14, and the Public Prosecutor General noted that Article 135-17 also covers attempts.
The conduct is now an offence in its own right. Prosecutors no longer have to prove one of the additional acts listed in Article 135-14(2), such as reconnaissance of targets, training or a stay in a theatre of operations of terrorist groups.
Support for victims written into law
Article 2 adds a paragraph to Article 77 of the law on judicial organisation: the victim support service of the Central Social Assistance Service must be available to victims of a terrorist attack immediately after the attack and for as long as necessary. The Commission had acknowledged that such support existed in practice but insisted that the law guarantee it, so that it would not depend on political choices or funding. The Council of State observed that the service already helps victims of all criminal offences and that the addition states the obvious, but it accepted the wording as useful information for potential victims.
Why the changes matter for terrorist financing
The bill does not amend the terrorist financing offence, but it widens the range of terrorist offences in the Criminal Code. Under Article 11 of the directive, providing or collecting funds to commit any offence in Articles 3 to 10 must be a criminal offence, and the acts codified here are Article 3 offences. For financing linked to Article 3, the directive does not require the funds to be actually used. For banks and other obliged entities, money intended for weapons, explosives or dangerous substances to be used with a terrorist aim is therefore terrorist financing even if no attack follows.
The directive’s recitals also describe how terrorist groups raise money: illicit trade in firearms, fuel, drugs, cigarettes, counterfeit goods and cultural objects, trafficking in human beings, racketeering and extortion. Financial crime teams already monitor these predicate offences for money laundering, and the same alerts can point to terrorist financing.
A late but complete transposition
The directive dates from 15 March 2017. Luxembourg transposed it in 2020, received the reasoned opinion in 2023 and filed this bill on 29 March 2024. The Superior Court of Justice, the Luxembourg public prosecutor’s office and the Diekirch district court raised no objections. Both formal objections from the Council of State concerned penalty levels. Amendments adopted by the Justice Committee on 21 November 2024 resolved them, and the Council of State confirmed this in its complementary opinion of 20 December 2024.
Dive deeper
- CHD ¦ Projet de loi 8368 – Dossier consolidé (modification du Code pénal et de la loi modifiée du 7 mars 1980 sur l’organisation judiciaire, transposition de la directive (UE) 2017/541 relative à la lutte contre le terrorisme) ¦ Link
EU Sanctions Helpdesk
The EU Sanctions Helpdesk platform supports European operators in complying with European Union restrictive measures (also known as sanctions) imposed worldwide.
Aimed primarily at Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), the Helpdesk offers resources and personalised help to companies performing sanctions due diligence checks.