On Thursday 23 April 2026, the Grand Ducal Fire and Rescue Corps (CGDIS) reported that the process to revise the SAMU framework, initiated by the CGDIS in order to enable the Emergency Medical Service (SAMU) to guarantee the best possible care for patients, has been postponed.

The initiative forms part of the CGDIS’s legal responsibility to ensure the organisation of SAMU services and the quality of pre-hospital care for the population, while enabling Luxembourg to benefit from an even more resilient system that is more effective and better prepared for future challenges. The revised framework includes adaptations to developments and requirements in pre-hospital care and harmonising practices in line with current international recommendations. 

The CGDIS noted that it was approached by emergency doctors practising in Luxembourg and with experience in pre-hospital care abroad, with a view to participating in SAMU missions in Luxembourg, and it was within this framework that, in October 2025, the Board of Directors of the CGDIS sought the opinion of all stakeholders involved, while mandating an interdisciplinary working group to draft a new framework.

Following the completion of the consultation process and drafting work, the Board of Directors of the CGDIS placed the presentation and vote on the new SAMU framework on the agenda of its plenary session of Thursday 23 April 2026.

However, on the evening of Sunday 19 April the members of the Board received a legal opinion prepared at the request of the Circle of Anaesthetists and Intensive Care Physicians of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (CMARL). This subsequently led to the postponement of the vote on the new SAMU framework to a later meeting. 

The CGDIS said its Board of Directors has decided to take the necessary time to analyse the opinion in detail.

The CGDIS said: “The Board of Directors regrets that this legal opinion was only received after the completion of the working group’s activities, to which CMARL had been closely associated. At no point was it indicated that such an opinion had been requested, so that it could be considered in due time. This approach has resulted in a delay to the ongoing work and, in the view of the Board of Directors, does not align with the objective of doing everything possible to continuously improve pre-hospital care for the population of the country.”