According to the site, President Cavaco Silva deemed that there had not been a sufficiently public debate and that it still remained “to be demonstrated” as to whether or not the legal changes “foster the wellbeing of children.”

The argument continued that “the principle of equality did not necessarily impose the solution now proposed" and hence it did not make sense that such result in a constitutional or legal imposition.

Cavaco Silva highlighted that there had been public debate, with over 20 parliamentary auditions, over co-adoption but that this legislative solution had been rejected in the final legislation and that would have limited the scope of adoption to the co-adoption of any descendent of one’s partner.

The President’s statement added that “the superior interests of the child should prevail over all others, especially those of children undergoing adoption."

In the case of the abortion legislation, Cavaco Silva acted to reverse changes made to legislation passed under the former centre-right government that had both imposed hospital charges and requirements to undertake psychological counselling prior to any abortion with the president’s statement saying that removing the latter “reduced patient rights to information.”

The law now returned to parliament would also have excluded conscientious medical objectors from the list of doctors and professional staff providing such counselling that the president in turn adjudged a “a lack of trust as regards the professional neutrality” of such objectors in their provision of such advice.

In early reactions, Vice President of the gay rights group ILGA, Paulo Corte-Real, said that the veto would be overturned at the first opportunity by the parliament with the president then required to sign it into effect.

Indeed, the legislation will come into effect should parliament duly re-approve it with an overall majority.