| BELGIUM Kingdom of Belgium Royaume de Belgique/Koninkrijk Belgie Joined United Nations: 27 December 1945 Human Rights as assured by their constitution Click here Updated 11/26/10 |
| CAPITAL |
| POPULATION |
| CHIEF OF STATE |
| SELECTION PROCESS |
Brussels
10,423,493 (July 2010 est.)
Yves Leterme
Prime Minister since 25 November 2009
Prime Minister since 25 November 2009
The monarchy as well as the heir apparent is hereditary and
constitutional
Next scheduled election: None
constitutional
Next scheduled election: None
HEAD OF GOVERNMENT
SELECTION PROCESS
Following the election Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy to
the presidency of the European Union, was appointed by the
Monarch and approved by the Parliament.
Note - the king accepted the resignation of LETERME on
26 April 2010; LETERME remains as caretaker
cabinet: Council of Ministers are formally appointed by
the monarch
the presidency of the European Union, was appointed by the
Monarch and approved by the Parliament.
Note - the king accepted the resignation of LETERME on
26 April 2010; LETERME remains as caretaker
cabinet: Council of Ministers are formally appointed by
the monarch
| DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS |
| ETHNIC GROUPS |
Fleming 58%, Walloon 31%, mixed or other 11%
| RELIGIONS |
Roman Catholic 75%, other (includes Protestant) 25%
| GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE |
Federal parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarchy with 10 provinces (French: provinces, singular - province; Dutch:
provincies, singular - provincie) and 3 regions (French: regions; Dutch: gewesten); Legal system is based on civil law system influenced
by English constitutional theory; judicial review of legislative acts; accepts compulsory ICJ jurisdiction, with reservations
Executive: The monarchy is hereditary and constitutional; following legislative elections, the leader of the majority party or the leader of the
majority coalition is usually appointed prime minister by the monarch and then approved by parliament; elections: last held 10 June 2007
(next to be held June 2011)
Legislative: Bicameral Parliament consists of a Senate or Senaat in Dutch, Senat in French (71 seats; 40 members are directly
elected by popular vote, 31 are indirectly elected; to serve four-year terms) and a Chamber of Deputies or Kamer van
Volksvertegenwoordigers in Dutch, Chambre des Representants in French (150 seats; members are directly elected by popular
vote on the basis of proportional representation to serve four-year terms)
elections: Senate and Chamber of Deputies - last held 10 June 2007 (next to be held June 2011)
Judicial: Supreme Court of Justice or Hof van Cassatie (in Dutch) or Cour de Cassation (in French) (judges are appointed for life
by the government; candidacies have to be submitted by the High Justice Council)
provincies, singular - provincie) and 3 regions (French: regions; Dutch: gewesten); Legal system is based on civil law system influenced
by English constitutional theory; judicial review of legislative acts; accepts compulsory ICJ jurisdiction, with reservations
Executive: The monarchy is hereditary and constitutional; following legislative elections, the leader of the majority party or the leader of the
majority coalition is usually appointed prime minister by the monarch and then approved by parliament; elections: last held 10 June 2007
(next to be held June 2011)
Legislative: Bicameral Parliament consists of a Senate or Senaat in Dutch, Senat in French (71 seats; 40 members are directly
elected by popular vote, 31 are indirectly elected; to serve four-year terms) and a Chamber of Deputies or Kamer van
Volksvertegenwoordigers in Dutch, Chambre des Representants in French (150 seats; members are directly elected by popular
vote on the basis of proportional representation to serve four-year terms)
elections: Senate and Chamber of Deputies - last held 10 June 2007 (next to be held June 2011)
Judicial: Supreme Court of Justice or Hof van Cassatie (in Dutch) or Cour de Cassation (in French) (judges are appointed for life
by the government; candidacies have to be submitted by the High Justice Council)
| LANGUAGES |
Dutch (official) 60%, French (official) 40%, German (official) less than 1%, legally bilingual (Dutch and French)
| BRIEF HISTORY |
The oldest primitive stone instruments found on the area of today's Belgium date 800,000 BC. Circa 400,000 BC, Neanderthals
are claimed to be living on the edge of the Meuse river, near the village of Spy. From 30,000 BC onwards the inhabitants were
Homo sapiens. Neolithic remains can be found today at Spiennes where there was a flint mine. The first signs of Bronze age activity
in Belgium date from around 1750 BC. From 500 BC Celtic tribes settled in the region and traded with the Mediterranean world.
From c. 150 BC, the first coins came into use. The earliest named inhabitants of Belgium were the Belgae (after whom modern
Belgium is named). In 54 BC, the Belgae were over-run by the armies of Julius Caesar, as described in his chronicle De Bello
Gallico. What is now Belgium flourished as a province of Rome. After the Roman Empire collapsed (5th century), Germanic tribes
invaded the Roman province of "Gallia". One of these peoples, the Franks, eventually managed to install a new kingdom under the
rule of the Merovingian Dynasty. Clovis I was the best-known king of this dynasty. He ruled from his base in northern France, but
his empire included today's Belgium. He converted to Christianity. The Merovingians were short-lived and were succeeded by the
Carolingian Dynasty. After Charles Martel countered the Moorish invasion from Spain (732 - Poitiers), the King Charlemagne
(born close to Liège in Herstal or Jupille) brought a huge part of Europe under his rule and was crowned the "Emperor of the Holy
Roman Empire" by the Pope Leo III (800 in Aachen). The Vikings were defeated in 891 by Arnulf of Carinthia near Leuven. The
Frankish lands were divided and reunified several times under the Merovingian and Carolingian dynasties, but eventually were firmly
divided into France and the Holy Roman Empire. The parts of the County of Flanders stretching out west of the river Scheldt
(Schelde in Dutch, Escaut in French) became part of France during the Middle Ages, but the remainders of the County of Flanders
and the Low Countries were part of the Holy Roman Empire. As the Holy Roman Emperors lost effective control of their domains
in the 11th and 12th centuries, the territory more or less corresponding to the present Belgium was divided into mostly independent
feudal states. During the 11th and 12th centuries, the Rheno-Mosan or Mosan art movement flourished in the region moving its
centre from Cologne and Trier to Liège, Maastricht and Aachen. By 1433 most of the Belgian and Luxembourgian territory along
with much of the rest of the Low Countries became part of Burgundy under Philip the Good. When Mary of Burgundy,
granddaughter of Philip the Good married Maximilian I, the Low Countries became Habsburg territory. Especially during the
Burgundy period (the 15th and 16th centuries), Ypres, Ghent, Bruges, Brussels, and Antwerp took turns at being major European
centers for commerce, industry (especially textiles) and art. The Pragmatic Sanction of 1549, issued by Charles V, established the
Seventeen Provinces (or Spanish Netherlands in its broad sense) as an entity separate from the Empire and from France. This
comprised all of the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg except for the lands of the Bishopric of Liège. When Philip II, son of
Charles ascended the Spanish throne, he tried to abolish all Protestantism. Portions of the Netherlands revolted, beginning the
Eighty Years' War between the Netherlands and Spain. For the conquered Southern Netherlands the war ended in 1585 with the
Fall of Antwerp. This can be seen as the start of Belgium as one region. While the United Provinces gained independence, the
Southern Netherlands remained under the rule of the Spanish Hapsburgs (1519-1713). Until 1581 the history of Belgium (except
the Bishopric of Liège), the grand duchy of Luxembourg and the country the Netherlands is the same: they formed the
country/region of the Netherlands or the Low Countries. The Belgian and Luxemburgian territories except the Bishopric of Liège
were transferred to the Austrian Hapsburgs (1713-1794) after the War of the Spanish Succession when the French Bourbon
Dynasty inherited Spain at the price of abandoning many Spanish possessions. Following the Campaigns of 1794 of the French
Revolutionary Wars the Southern Netherlands were invaded and annexed by the First French Republic in 1795, they were divided
into nine united départements and became an integral part of France. The Bishopric of Liège was dissolved. Its territory was divided
over the départements Meuse-Inférieure and Ourte. Austria confirmed the loss of the Austrian Netherlands by the Treaty of Campo
Formio, in 1797. After Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo in 1815, the major victorious powers (Britain, Austria, Prussia, Russia)
agreed at Congress of Vienna on reuniting the former Austrian Netherlands and the former Dutch Republic, creating the United
Kingdom of the Netherlands, which was to serve as a buffer state against any future French invasions. In August 1830, stirred by a
performance of Auber's La Muette de Portici at the Brussels opera house La Monnaie (Dutch: De Munt), the Belgian Revolution
broke out, and the country wrested its independence from the Dutch, aided by French intellectuals and French armed forces.
Among the revolutionaries, there was an idea to rejoin France, but after international pressure, Belgium became an independent
state. A constitutional monarchy was established in 1831, with a monarch invited in from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha in
Germany by the British. The major powers in Europe agreed, and on July 21 1831, the first king of Belgium, Leopold of Saxe-
Coburg was inaugurated. This day is still the Belgian national holiday. The Netherlands still fought on for 8 years, but in 1839 a
treaty was signed between the two countries. At the Berlin conference of 1884-1885 the Congo was attributed solely to Leopold II
of Belgium, who named the territory the Congo Free State. Power was finally transferred to Belgium in 1908 under considerable
international pressure following numerous reports of gross misconduct and abuse to native labourers. The neutrality of Belgium was
violated in 1914 when Germany invaded Belgium as part of the Schlieffen Plan. The Germans were stopped by the Allies at the
front-line along the Yser, the battle of the Yser. King Albert I stayed in Belgium with his troops to lead the army while the
government withdrew to Le Havre, France. Belgium did not receive the war reparations that she was to receive from Germany. This
had a significant effect on the Belgium economy, which, like the economies of many countries involved in World War One, had been
bankrupted by the war. After the defeat of Germany, the two former German colonies, Rwanda and Burundi, were mandated to
Belgium by the League of Nations. After a period of alliance with France, Belgium tried to return to neutrality in the 1930s. Nazi
Germany invaded Belgium 10 May 1940 (Belgium surrendered on May 28). The King remained in Belgium. Belgium was liberated
beginning in 1944 by Allied forces, including British, Canadian, and American armies, including a small Belgian national contingent.
During the war, the largest known reserves of uranium were in the Katanga (a province of the Belgian Congo). The Belgian
company Union Minière du Haut Katanga provided the United States the uranium required by the Manhattan Project and the early
cold war. A dispute over King Léopold III's conduct during World War II caused civil uprisings, and eventually led to his
abdication in 1951 following a statewide referendum. The Congo became independent in 1960. Belgium played in this crisis an
ambiguous role which led to the murder of Patrice Lumumba and to the establishment of Zaire. The fourth state reform, which took
place in 1993 under Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene, consolidated the previous state reforms and turned Belgium into a fully-
fledged federal state. The first article of the Belgian Constitution was amended to read as follows, “Belgium is a Federal State which
consists of Communities and Regions”. On January 30, 2003, Belgium became the second country in the world to legally recognize
same-sex marriage. However, this law did not permit adoption by same-sex partners; and as birth within a same-sex marriage did
not imply affiliation, the same-sex spouse of the biological parent had no way to become the legal parent. On December 1, 2005, a
controversial proposal of the SP.A to permit adoption was approved by the Belgian Chamber of Representatives, thereby enabling
legal co-parenting by same-sex couples.
Source: Wikipedia: History of Belgium
are claimed to be living on the edge of the Meuse river, near the village of Spy. From 30,000 BC onwards the inhabitants were
Homo sapiens. Neolithic remains can be found today at Spiennes where there was a flint mine. The first signs of Bronze age activity
in Belgium date from around 1750 BC. From 500 BC Celtic tribes settled in the region and traded with the Mediterranean world.
From c. 150 BC, the first coins came into use. The earliest named inhabitants of Belgium were the Belgae (after whom modern
Belgium is named). In 54 BC, the Belgae were over-run by the armies of Julius Caesar, as described in his chronicle De Bello
Gallico. What is now Belgium flourished as a province of Rome. After the Roman Empire collapsed (5th century), Germanic tribes
invaded the Roman province of "Gallia". One of these peoples, the Franks, eventually managed to install a new kingdom under the
rule of the Merovingian Dynasty. Clovis I was the best-known king of this dynasty. He ruled from his base in northern France, but
his empire included today's Belgium. He converted to Christianity. The Merovingians were short-lived and were succeeded by the
Carolingian Dynasty. After Charles Martel countered the Moorish invasion from Spain (732 - Poitiers), the King Charlemagne
(born close to Liège in Herstal or Jupille) brought a huge part of Europe under his rule and was crowned the "Emperor of the Holy
Roman Empire" by the Pope Leo III (800 in Aachen). The Vikings were defeated in 891 by Arnulf of Carinthia near Leuven. The
Frankish lands were divided and reunified several times under the Merovingian and Carolingian dynasties, but eventually were firmly
divided into France and the Holy Roman Empire. The parts of the County of Flanders stretching out west of the river Scheldt
(Schelde in Dutch, Escaut in French) became part of France during the Middle Ages, but the remainders of the County of Flanders
and the Low Countries were part of the Holy Roman Empire. As the Holy Roman Emperors lost effective control of their domains
in the 11th and 12th centuries, the territory more or less corresponding to the present Belgium was divided into mostly independent
feudal states. During the 11th and 12th centuries, the Rheno-Mosan or Mosan art movement flourished in the region moving its
centre from Cologne and Trier to Liège, Maastricht and Aachen. By 1433 most of the Belgian and Luxembourgian territory along
with much of the rest of the Low Countries became part of Burgundy under Philip the Good. When Mary of Burgundy,
granddaughter of Philip the Good married Maximilian I, the Low Countries became Habsburg territory. Especially during the
Burgundy period (the 15th and 16th centuries), Ypres, Ghent, Bruges, Brussels, and Antwerp took turns at being major European
centers for commerce, industry (especially textiles) and art. The Pragmatic Sanction of 1549, issued by Charles V, established the
Seventeen Provinces (or Spanish Netherlands in its broad sense) as an entity separate from the Empire and from France. This
comprised all of the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg except for the lands of the Bishopric of Liège. When Philip II, son of
Charles ascended the Spanish throne, he tried to abolish all Protestantism. Portions of the Netherlands revolted, beginning the
Eighty Years' War between the Netherlands and Spain. For the conquered Southern Netherlands the war ended in 1585 with the
Fall of Antwerp. This can be seen as the start of Belgium as one region. While the United Provinces gained independence, the
Southern Netherlands remained under the rule of the Spanish Hapsburgs (1519-1713). Until 1581 the history of Belgium (except
the Bishopric of Liège), the grand duchy of Luxembourg and the country the Netherlands is the same: they formed the
country/region of the Netherlands or the Low Countries. The Belgian and Luxemburgian territories except the Bishopric of Liège
were transferred to the Austrian Hapsburgs (1713-1794) after the War of the Spanish Succession when the French Bourbon
Dynasty inherited Spain at the price of abandoning many Spanish possessions. Following the Campaigns of 1794 of the French
Revolutionary Wars the Southern Netherlands were invaded and annexed by the First French Republic in 1795, they were divided
into nine united départements and became an integral part of France. The Bishopric of Liège was dissolved. Its territory was divided
over the départements Meuse-Inférieure and Ourte. Austria confirmed the loss of the Austrian Netherlands by the Treaty of Campo
Formio, in 1797. After Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo in 1815, the major victorious powers (Britain, Austria, Prussia, Russia)
agreed at Congress of Vienna on reuniting the former Austrian Netherlands and the former Dutch Republic, creating the United
Kingdom of the Netherlands, which was to serve as a buffer state against any future French invasions. In August 1830, stirred by a
performance of Auber's La Muette de Portici at the Brussels opera house La Monnaie (Dutch: De Munt), the Belgian Revolution
broke out, and the country wrested its independence from the Dutch, aided by French intellectuals and French armed forces.
Among the revolutionaries, there was an idea to rejoin France, but after international pressure, Belgium became an independent
state. A constitutional monarchy was established in 1831, with a monarch invited in from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha in
Germany by the British. The major powers in Europe agreed, and on July 21 1831, the first king of Belgium, Leopold of Saxe-
Coburg was inaugurated. This day is still the Belgian national holiday. The Netherlands still fought on for 8 years, but in 1839 a
treaty was signed between the two countries. At the Berlin conference of 1884-1885 the Congo was attributed solely to Leopold II
of Belgium, who named the territory the Congo Free State. Power was finally transferred to Belgium in 1908 under considerable
international pressure following numerous reports of gross misconduct and abuse to native labourers. The neutrality of Belgium was
violated in 1914 when Germany invaded Belgium as part of the Schlieffen Plan. The Germans were stopped by the Allies at the
front-line along the Yser, the battle of the Yser. King Albert I stayed in Belgium with his troops to lead the army while the
government withdrew to Le Havre, France. Belgium did not receive the war reparations that she was to receive from Germany. This
had a significant effect on the Belgium economy, which, like the economies of many countries involved in World War One, had been
bankrupted by the war. After the defeat of Germany, the two former German colonies, Rwanda and Burundi, were mandated to
Belgium by the League of Nations. After a period of alliance with France, Belgium tried to return to neutrality in the 1930s. Nazi
Germany invaded Belgium 10 May 1940 (Belgium surrendered on May 28). The King remained in Belgium. Belgium was liberated
beginning in 1944 by Allied forces, including British, Canadian, and American armies, including a small Belgian national contingent.
During the war, the largest known reserves of uranium were in the Katanga (a province of the Belgian Congo). The Belgian
company Union Minière du Haut Katanga provided the United States the uranium required by the Manhattan Project and the early
cold war. A dispute over King Léopold III's conduct during World War II caused civil uprisings, and eventually led to his
abdication in 1951 following a statewide referendum. The Congo became independent in 1960. Belgium played in this crisis an
ambiguous role which led to the murder of Patrice Lumumba and to the establishment of Zaire. The fourth state reform, which took
place in 1993 under Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene, consolidated the previous state reforms and turned Belgium into a fully-
fledged federal state. The first article of the Belgian Constitution was amended to read as follows, “Belgium is a Federal State which
consists of Communities and Regions”. On January 30, 2003, Belgium became the second country in the world to legally recognize
same-sex marriage. However, this law did not permit adoption by same-sex partners; and as birth within a same-sex marriage did
not imply affiliation, the same-sex spouse of the biological parent had no way to become the legal parent. On December 1, 2005, a
controversial proposal of the SP.A to permit adoption was approved by the Belgian Chamber of Representatives, thereby enabling
legal co-parenting by same-sex couples.
Source: Wikipedia: History of Belgium
| ECONOMIC OVERVIEW |
This modern, private-enterprise economy has capitalized on its central geographic location, highly developed transport network, and
diversified industrial and commercial base. Industry is concentrated mainly in the populous Flemish area in the north. With few
natural resources, Belgium must import substantial quantities of raw materials and export a large volume of manufactures, making its
economy vulnerable to volatility in world markets. Roughly three-quarters of Belgium's trade is with other EU countries and its
overall current account deficit widened to 4% of GDP in 2009. Public debt is nearly 100% of GDP. On the positive side, income
distribution is relatively equal and the government succeeded in balancing its budget during the 2000-2008 period. In 2009 Belgian
GDP contracted by 3.1%, the unemployment rate rose slightly, and the budget deficit worsened because of large-scale bail-outs in
the financial sector. Belgian banks have been severely affected by the international financial crisis with three major banks all
receiving capital injections from the government. An ageing population and rising social expenditures are also increasing pressure on
public finances, making it likely the government will need to implement unpopular austerity measures to restore fiscal balance.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Belgium)
diversified industrial and commercial base. Industry is concentrated mainly in the populous Flemish area in the north. With few
natural resources, Belgium must import substantial quantities of raw materials and export a large volume of manufactures, making its
economy vulnerable to volatility in world markets. Roughly three-quarters of Belgium's trade is with other EU countries and its
overall current account deficit widened to 4% of GDP in 2009. Public debt is nearly 100% of GDP. On the positive side, income
distribution is relatively equal and the government succeeded in balancing its budget during the 2000-2008 period. In 2009 Belgian
GDP contracted by 3.1%, the unemployment rate rose slightly, and the budget deficit worsened because of large-scale bail-outs in
the financial sector. Belgian banks have been severely affected by the international financial crisis with three major banks all
receiving capital injections from the government. An ageing population and rising social expenditures are also increasing pressure on
public finances, making it likely the government will need to implement unpopular austerity measures to restore fiscal balance.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Belgium)
| POLITICAL CLIMATE |
The current king, Albert II, succeeded King Baudouin I in 1993. Since 1999, Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt from the VLD has
led a six-party Liberal-Social Democrat-Greens coalition, often referred to as 'the rainbow government'. This was the first
government without the Christian Democrats since 1958. In the 2003 elections, Verhofstadt won a second term in office and has
led a Liberal-Social Democrat coalition of four parties. In recent years, there has also been a steady rise of the Flemish far right
nationalist separatist party Vlaams Blok, meanwhile superseded by Vlaams Belang amidst allegations of racism promoted by the
party.
A significant achievement of the two successive Verhofstadt governments has been the achievement of a balanced budget; Belgium
is one of the few member-states of the EU to have done so (largely thanks to the consensus on this priority among the Flemish
parties, the skills of the successive ministers of finance including Philippe Maystadt and Didier Reynders and the very good
budgetary performance of the Flemish government). This policy was applied by the successive governments during the 1990s under
pressure from the European Council. The fall of the previous government was mainly due to the dioxin crisis, a major food
intoxication scandal in 1999 that led to the establishment of the Belgian Food Agency. This event resulted in an atypically large
representation by the Greens in parliament, and a greater emphasis on environmental politics during the first Verhofstadt
government. One Green policy, for example, resulted in nuclear phase-out legislation, which has been modified by the current
government. The absence of Christian Democrats from the ranks of the government has enabled Verhofstadt to tackle social issues
from a more liberal point of view and to develop new legislation on the use of soft drugs, same-sex marriage and euthanasia. During
the two most recent parliaments, the government has promoted active diplomacy in Africa, opposed a military intervention during
the Iraq disarmament crisis, and has passed legislation concerning war crimes. Both of Verhofstadt's terms have been marked by
disputes between the Belgian communities. The major points of contention are the overly complicated institutional arrangements, the
lack of fiscal and financial autonomy for the regional and community governments, nocturnal air traffic routes at Brussels Airport, the
status of the electoral district of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde.
Source: Wikipedia: Politics of Belgium
led a six-party Liberal-Social Democrat-Greens coalition, often referred to as 'the rainbow government'. This was the first
government without the Christian Democrats since 1958. In the 2003 elections, Verhofstadt won a second term in office and has
led a Liberal-Social Democrat coalition of four parties. In recent years, there has also been a steady rise of the Flemish far right
nationalist separatist party Vlaams Blok, meanwhile superseded by Vlaams Belang amidst allegations of racism promoted by the
party.
A significant achievement of the two successive Verhofstadt governments has been the achievement of a balanced budget; Belgium
is one of the few member-states of the EU to have done so (largely thanks to the consensus on this priority among the Flemish
parties, the skills of the successive ministers of finance including Philippe Maystadt and Didier Reynders and the very good
budgetary performance of the Flemish government). This policy was applied by the successive governments during the 1990s under
pressure from the European Council. The fall of the previous government was mainly due to the dioxin crisis, a major food
intoxication scandal in 1999 that led to the establishment of the Belgian Food Agency. This event resulted in an atypically large
representation by the Greens in parliament, and a greater emphasis on environmental politics during the first Verhofstadt
government. One Green policy, for example, resulted in nuclear phase-out legislation, which has been modified by the current
government. The absence of Christian Democrats from the ranks of the government has enabled Verhofstadt to tackle social issues
from a more liberal point of view and to develop new legislation on the use of soft drugs, same-sex marriage and euthanasia. During
the two most recent parliaments, the government has promoted active diplomacy in Africa, opposed a military intervention during
the Iraq disarmament crisis, and has passed legislation concerning war crimes. Both of Verhofstadt's terms have been marked by
disputes between the Belgian communities. The major points of contention are the overly complicated institutional arrangements, the
lack of fiscal and financial autonomy for the regional and community governments, nocturnal air traffic routes at Brussels Airport, the
status of the electoral district of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde.
Source: Wikipedia: Politics of Belgium
| INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES |
None reported.
| REFUGEES AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDPS) |
None reported.
| ILLICIT DRUGS |
Growing producer of synthetic drugs and cannabis; transit point for US-bound ecstasy; source of precursor chemicals for South
American cocaine processors; transshipment point for cocaine, heroin, hashish, and marijuana entering Western Europe; despite
a strengthening of legislation, the country remains vulnerable to money laundering related to narcotics, automobiles, alcohol, and
tobacco; significant domestic consumption of ecstasy.
American cocaine processors; transshipment point for cocaine, heroin, hashish, and marijuana entering Western Europe; despite
a strengthening of legislation, the country remains vulnerable to money laundering related to narcotics, automobiles, alcohol, and
tobacco; significant domestic consumption of ecstasy.
| HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENTS, ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUES |
2009 Human Rights Report: Belgium
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
March 11, 2010
The Kingdom of Belgium, with a population of approximately 10.7 million, is a parliamentary democracy with a constitutional monarch
who plays a mainly symbolic role. The country is a federal state with several levels of government: national, regional (Flanders, Wallonia,
and Brussels), language community (Flemish, French, and German), provincial, and local. The council of ministers (cabinet), led by the
prime minister, holds office as long as it retains the confidence of the lower house (Chamber of Representatives) of the bicameral
parliament. Federal parliamentary elections held in 2007 were considered free and fair. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective
control of the security forces.
The following human rights problems were reported:
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
March 11, 2010
The Kingdom of Belgium, with a population of approximately 10.7 million, is a parliamentary democracy with a constitutional monarch
who plays a mainly symbolic role. The country is a federal state with several levels of government: national, regional (Flanders, Wallonia,
and Brussels), language community (Flemish, French, and German), provincial, and local. The council of ministers (cabinet), led by the
prime minister, holds office as long as it retains the confidence of the lower house (Chamber of Representatives) of the bicameral
parliament. Federal parliamentary elections held in 2007 were considered free and fair. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective
control of the security forces.
The following human rights problems were reported:
- overcrowded prisons,
- lengthy pretrial detention,
- poor detention conditions prior to expulsion of adults and children whose asylum applications were refused,
- violence against women,
- child abuse,
- trafficking in persons,
- racial and ethnic discrimination in the job market.
TRANSLATED FROM FRENCH BY GOOGLE TRANSLATE
Committee for Human Rights
Hundredth Session
Geneva, 11-29 October 2010
Introduction
2. The Committee welcomes the fifth periodic report of Belgium, and welcomes the dialogue held with the delegation of the State Party.
It commends the State party had submitted in advance of the written replies to the list of items that had been addressed
(CCPR/C/BEL/Q/5/Add.1), and the Delegation for detailed additional information it provided orally during the review report and for
additional written information.
Positive aspects
3. The Committee welcomes the ratification of the following instruments or accession to these instruments:
(A) The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Protocol, July 2, 2009;
(B) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, June 14, 2004;
(C) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale, prostitution and child pornography of children,
August 11, 2004;
(D) The United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking
in Persons, Especially Women and Children, November 17, 2005.
C. Concerns and recommendations
5. The Committee takes note of information and initiatives taken by the State party's implementation of its findings in the case of Nabil
Sayadi and Patricia Vinck (CCPR/C/D/1472/2006). He regretted, however, that the State party has not been able to inform about the
possibility of granting compensation to Nabil Sayadi and Patricia Vinck, and the Committee had requested.
The State party should consider the possibility of granting compensation to the applicants Nabil Sayadi and Patricia Vinck.
6. The Committee regrets the absence from the State Party to support a mechanism to implement the findings of the Committee (art. 2).
The State party should consider establishing a mechanism responsible for implementing the Committee's Views.
Click here to read more »
Committee for Human Rights
Hundredth Session
Geneva, 11-29 October 2010
Introduction
2. The Committee welcomes the fifth periodic report of Belgium, and welcomes the dialogue held with the delegation of the State Party.
It commends the State party had submitted in advance of the written replies to the list of items that had been addressed
(CCPR/C/BEL/Q/5/Add.1), and the Delegation for detailed additional information it provided orally during the review report and for
additional written information.
Positive aspects
3. The Committee welcomes the ratification of the following instruments or accession to these instruments:
(A) The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Protocol, July 2, 2009;
(B) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, June 14, 2004;
(C) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale, prostitution and child pornography of children,
August 11, 2004;
(D) The United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking
in Persons, Especially Women and Children, November 17, 2005.
C. Concerns and recommendations
5. The Committee takes note of information and initiatives taken by the State party's implementation of its findings in the case of Nabil
Sayadi and Patricia Vinck (CCPR/C/D/1472/2006). He regretted, however, that the State party has not been able to inform about the
possibility of granting compensation to Nabil Sayadi and Patricia Vinck, and the Committee had requested.
The State party should consider the possibility of granting compensation to the applicants Nabil Sayadi and Patricia Vinck.
6. The Committee regrets the absence from the State Party to support a mechanism to implement the findings of the Committee (art. 2).
The State party should consider establishing a mechanism responsible for implementing the Committee's Views.
Click here to read more »
Freedom In The World 2010 Report
Political Rights Score: 1
Civil Liberties Score: 1
Status: Free
Overview
Herman Van Rompuy, a Flemish Christian Democrat who had ended 18 months of political crisis in Belgium after becoming prime
minister in December 2008, resigned in November 2009 to assume his new post as the first permanent president of the European
Council. He was replaced as prime minister by his predecessor and fellow Christian Democrat, Yves Leterme.
Prior to the 2007 parliamentary elections, cultural and economic differences between the country’s regions had contributed to political
rifts between Flemish and Francophone parties across the ideological spectrum, with the wealthier Flemish north seeking increased self-
rule and reduced taxpayer support for the less prosperous Wallonia. Flanders premier Yves Leterme’s centrist Christian Democratic and
Flemish (CDV) party—in an electoral bloc with the New Flemish Alliance (N-VA)—led the June elections with 30 of 150 seats in the
lower house. The remaining seats were divided among 10 other factions. Leterme was invited by King Albert II to form a new
government, but because the Flemish and Walloon parties were unable to agree on coalition terms after an extraordinary 196 days of
negotiations, outgoing prime minister Guy Verhofstadt stayed on as a caretaker. In December 2007, Verhofstadt agreed to the request of
King Albert II to form an interim government with the authority to act on pressing economic and other concerns.
In February 2008, a majority of political parties agreed on an outline for limited constitutional reform, which cleared the way for Leterme
to become prime minister the following month. However, he was unable to consolidate support after taking office. The king rejected his
offer to resign in July, after he failed to win approval for a regional autonomy plan, and lawmakers began to leave the ruling coalition
during the fall. Leterme’s government was ultimately brought down at the end of the year after being accused of interfering in a court
case concerning the failed bank, Fortis. The prime minister offered his resignation again in December, this time refusing to return to his
post. On December 30, the king swore in Herman Van Rompuy, also of the CDV, to replace him.
Van Rompuy’s time in office proved to be brief, but noteworthy. His 11-month term is regarded as a time during which the instabilities
and divisions of the recent past were laid to rest. In part due to his burgeoning reputation as a consensus-builder, Van Rompuy emerged
in the fall of 2009 as a leading candidate to fill the new position of the first permanent president of the European Council, the supreme
intergovernmental decision-making body in the EU comprising the heads of state and government of the member states. The post was
created by the Lisbon Treaty to end the six-month rotation of the Council’s presidency between the heads of state of the country holding
the presidency of the EU. Van Rompuy was unanimously appointed by the 27 EU member states on November 19. On November 24, it
was announced that Leterme would succeed Van Rompuy as prime minister.
Click here to read more »
Political Rights Score: 1
Civil Liberties Score: 1
Status: Free
Overview
Herman Van Rompuy, a Flemish Christian Democrat who had ended 18 months of political crisis in Belgium after becoming prime
minister in December 2008, resigned in November 2009 to assume his new post as the first permanent president of the European
Council. He was replaced as prime minister by his predecessor and fellow Christian Democrat, Yves Leterme.
Prior to the 2007 parliamentary elections, cultural and economic differences between the country’s regions had contributed to political
rifts between Flemish and Francophone parties across the ideological spectrum, with the wealthier Flemish north seeking increased self-
rule and reduced taxpayer support for the less prosperous Wallonia. Flanders premier Yves Leterme’s centrist Christian Democratic and
Flemish (CDV) party—in an electoral bloc with the New Flemish Alliance (N-VA)—led the June elections with 30 of 150 seats in the
lower house. The remaining seats were divided among 10 other factions. Leterme was invited by King Albert II to form a new
government, but because the Flemish and Walloon parties were unable to agree on coalition terms after an extraordinary 196 days of
negotiations, outgoing prime minister Guy Verhofstadt stayed on as a caretaker. In December 2007, Verhofstadt agreed to the request of
King Albert II to form an interim government with the authority to act on pressing economic and other concerns.
In February 2008, a majority of political parties agreed on an outline for limited constitutional reform, which cleared the way for Leterme
to become prime minister the following month. However, he was unable to consolidate support after taking office. The king rejected his
offer to resign in July, after he failed to win approval for a regional autonomy plan, and lawmakers began to leave the ruling coalition
during the fall. Leterme’s government was ultimately brought down at the end of the year after being accused of interfering in a court
case concerning the failed bank, Fortis. The prime minister offered his resignation again in December, this time refusing to return to his
post. On December 30, the king swore in Herman Van Rompuy, also of the CDV, to replace him.
Van Rompuy’s time in office proved to be brief, but noteworthy. His 11-month term is regarded as a time during which the instabilities
and divisions of the recent past were laid to rest. In part due to his burgeoning reputation as a consensus-builder, Van Rompuy emerged
in the fall of 2009 as a leading candidate to fill the new position of the first permanent president of the European Council, the supreme
intergovernmental decision-making body in the EU comprising the heads of state and government of the member states. The post was
created by the Lisbon Treaty to end the six-month rotation of the Council’s presidency between the heads of state of the country holding
the presidency of the EU. Van Rompuy was unanimously appointed by the 27 EU member states on November 19. On November 24, it
was announced that Leterme would succeed Van Rompuy as prime minister.
Click here to read more »
The Wire, August/September 2010. Vol. 40, issue 04
Where we Stand:
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OPPOSES COMPREHENSIVE BANS ON FULL FACE VEILS. WIRE EXPLAINS WHY
AND LOOKS AT SOME OF THE KEY HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES.
In the last few months, Belgium, France, the Canadian province of Québec and a number of municipalities in Spain have moved to ban
the wearing of full-face veils in public. There is a strong possibility that similar bans will be introduced in other countries.
In opposing these bans, Amnesty International has, not for the first time, gone against the current of popular opinion. Why have we done
this? Our starting point is international human rights law – in this case, the rights to freedom of expression and religion. As a general
rule, people should be free to choose what and what not to wear.
This is why Amnesty International opposes mandatory dress codes in Iran and Saudi Arabia just as strongly as it objects to state-
imposed restrictions prohibiting certain forms of dress anywhere else in the world.
The rights to freedom of expression and the manifestation of religious belief are not absolute.
Restrictions may be imposed where they are demonstrably necessary in the interests of public safety, the protection of public order,
health, morals or the protection of the rights of others. However, comprehensive bans on full-face veils are not necessary in order to
achieve any of these goals.
FAILING TO PROTECT WOMEN’S RIGHTS
One of the main arguments in support of the bans is that they are necessary to ensure gender equality and to protect women from being
pressured at home or within their communities to wear full-face veils. Advocates for this argument include members of the human rights
community and the women’s rights movement.
These are clearly important considerations, and states are obliged to safeguard the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of expression and
religion against interference by others (including private individuals, such as family and community members). But comprehensive bans
are not the way to do this.
Protecting some women from being forced to wear full-face veils does not justify denying others the right to wear them if they choose
to. In addition, there is the risk that women who currently wear fullface veils will become confined to their homes, less
able to work or study and to access public services.
Governments should instead be looking to strengthen efforts to combat the discrimination faced by Muslim women, both in their
communities and in the broader societies in which they live. Their focus should be on empowering women to make their own choices,
rather than limit the range of choices available to them.
Click here to read more »
Where we Stand:
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OPPOSES COMPREHENSIVE BANS ON FULL FACE VEILS. WIRE EXPLAINS WHY
AND LOOKS AT SOME OF THE KEY HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES.
In the last few months, Belgium, France, the Canadian province of Québec and a number of municipalities in Spain have moved to ban
the wearing of full-face veils in public. There is a strong possibility that similar bans will be introduced in other countries.
In opposing these bans, Amnesty International has, not for the first time, gone against the current of popular opinion. Why have we done
this? Our starting point is international human rights law – in this case, the rights to freedom of expression and religion. As a general
rule, people should be free to choose what and what not to wear.
This is why Amnesty International opposes mandatory dress codes in Iran and Saudi Arabia just as strongly as it objects to state-
imposed restrictions prohibiting certain forms of dress anywhere else in the world.
The rights to freedom of expression and the manifestation of religious belief are not absolute.
Restrictions may be imposed where they are demonstrably necessary in the interests of public safety, the protection of public order,
health, morals or the protection of the rights of others. However, comprehensive bans on full-face veils are not necessary in order to
achieve any of these goals.
FAILING TO PROTECT WOMEN’S RIGHTS
One of the main arguments in support of the bans is that they are necessary to ensure gender equality and to protect women from being
pressured at home or within their communities to wear full-face veils. Advocates for this argument include members of the human rights
community and the women’s rights movement.
These are clearly important considerations, and states are obliged to safeguard the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of expression and
religion against interference by others (including private individuals, such as family and community members). But comprehensive bans
are not the way to do this.
Protecting some women from being forced to wear full-face veils does not justify denying others the right to wear them if they choose
to. In addition, there is the risk that women who currently wear fullface veils will become confined to their homes, less
able to work or study and to access public services.
Governments should instead be looking to strengthen efforts to combat the discrimination faced by Muslim women, both in their
communities and in the broader societies in which they live. Their focus should be on empowering women to make their own choices,
rather than limit the range of choices available to them.
Click here to read more »
Belgium: Muslim Veil Ban Would Violate Rights
Parliament Should Reject Bill for Nationwide Restrictions
April 21, 2010
(Brussels, April 21, 2010) - The Belgian Parliament should vote down a bill that would criminalize wearing the full Muslim veil in all
public places in Belgium, Human Rights Watch said today. The lower chamber of Parliament is expected to debate the bill, approved in
the Home Affairs Committee at the end of March, in the plenary session that opens on April 22, 2010.
"Bans like this lead to a lose-lose situation," said Judith Sunderland, senior Western Europe researcher at Human Rights Watch. "They
violate the rights of those who choose to wear the veil and do nothing to help those who are compelled to do so."
Twenty out of 589 municipalities in Belgium already prohibit wearing full Muslim veils in public. Similar local restrictions exist in parts of
Italy and the Netherlands. However, approval by the Belgian Parliament of the current bill would make Belgium the first country in
Europe to adopt a nationwide ban.
The bill, approved unanimously by the lower chamber's Home Affairs Committee on March 31, would make it a crime to be in a public
place with one's face partially or wholly concealed in a way that would make identification impossible. Violators would be subject to a
fine of 15 to 25 euros and/or a prison sentence of one to seven days. While the bill is couched in neutral language, the measure is clearly
aimed at prohibiting women from wearing the burqa and niqab in public.
Mouvement Réformateur, the center-right political party that initiated the bill, describes it as a ban on burqas, promoting the measure as a
way to liberate women and ensure public security, as well as to send a "message" to Islamists.
There is no evidence that wearing the full veil in public threatens public safety, public order, health, morals, or the fundamental rights
and freedoms of others - the only legitimate grounds for interference with fundamental rights, Human Rights Watch said. And rather
than help women who are coerced into wearing the veil, a ban would limit, if not eliminate, their ability to seek advice and support.
Indeed, the primary impact of legislation of this kind would be to confine these women to their homes, rather than to liberate them,
Human Rights Watch said.
There are no official statistics on how many women wear face-covering veils, though analysts agree it is a marginal phenomenon among
the roughly 400,000 Muslims living in Belgium (about 4 percent of the country's population). In 2009, 29 women were stopped by police
in eight municipalities in the Brussels region that ban the full Muslim veil. It is unclear whether the women were penalized as a result.
Click here to read more »
Parliament Should Reject Bill for Nationwide Restrictions
April 21, 2010
(Brussels, April 21, 2010) - The Belgian Parliament should vote down a bill that would criminalize wearing the full Muslim veil in all
public places in Belgium, Human Rights Watch said today. The lower chamber of Parliament is expected to debate the bill, approved in
the Home Affairs Committee at the end of March, in the plenary session that opens on April 22, 2010.
"Bans like this lead to a lose-lose situation," said Judith Sunderland, senior Western Europe researcher at Human Rights Watch. "They
violate the rights of those who choose to wear the veil and do nothing to help those who are compelled to do so."
Twenty out of 589 municipalities in Belgium already prohibit wearing full Muslim veils in public. Similar local restrictions exist in parts of
Italy and the Netherlands. However, approval by the Belgian Parliament of the current bill would make Belgium the first country in
Europe to adopt a nationwide ban.
The bill, approved unanimously by the lower chamber's Home Affairs Committee on March 31, would make it a crime to be in a public
place with one's face partially or wholly concealed in a way that would make identification impossible. Violators would be subject to a
fine of 15 to 25 euros and/or a prison sentence of one to seven days. While the bill is couched in neutral language, the measure is clearly
aimed at prohibiting women from wearing the burqa and niqab in public.
Mouvement Réformateur, the center-right political party that initiated the bill, describes it as a ban on burqas, promoting the measure as a
way to liberate women and ensure public security, as well as to send a "message" to Islamists.
There is no evidence that wearing the full veil in public threatens public safety, public order, health, morals, or the fundamental rights
and freedoms of others - the only legitimate grounds for interference with fundamental rights, Human Rights Watch said. And rather
than help women who are coerced into wearing the veil, a ban would limit, if not eliminate, their ability to seek advice and support.
Indeed, the primary impact of legislation of this kind would be to confine these women to their homes, rather than to liberate them,
Human Rights Watch said.
There are no official statistics on how many women wear face-covering veils, though analysts agree it is a marginal phenomenon among
the roughly 400,000 Muslims living in Belgium (about 4 percent of the country's population). In 2009, 29 women were stopped by police
in eight municipalities in the Brussels region that ban the full Muslim veil. It is unclear whether the women were penalized as a result.
Click here to read more »
TRANSLATED FROM FRENCH BY GOOGLE TRANSLATE
23 September 2010
General Debate 65th UN General Assembly
Statement by H.E. Mr. Steven Vanackere, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Belgium
Distinguished delegates,
History shows that words can change the image of the world. It proves that words can influence the future. But only when they exceed
the point of declaration. What is our "global governance" if it does not go beyond? Beyond the formulation of goals and intentions? The
words are not effective if the actions do not follow. We must act. I say "we, the nations, united way, for no country, however great he
is only able to respond to major challenges facing humanity. I say we, because no major problem is not confined to one country, not
touching the lives of those who live elsewhere. The obligation to act is a global responsibility and shared.
That Is Why my message today Is About Increased Responsibility and accountability. At the Heart of "any form of governance
responsibility" lies. Be it global or local, national or international. Goal This Is Not Enough. Indeed, only about governance is Not
Behaving Responsibly, it est également about Being Accountable. This fixe at The Level Of The single state, goal aussi At The level of
"our United Nations". Human Rights, Security and Development are At The Core Of The mandate of the United Nations. Secretary
General Kofi Annan form Already Pointed At The Fact That The Three are inextricably linked When He Said "There Is No Development
Without security, no security Without development, and Both Depends on the respect for human rights and the Rule of Law. . Indeed it
has Become Common Knowledge That human rights are protected Unlikely To Be In An insecure environment and Underdeveloped
Economic Development And That Can not Be Sustained durably in a Society Where There Is No rule of law.
The creation of A Women Is A welcome development. It has my country's full support. Of race, gender Will Need to stay a mainstream
theme Influencing The action of Each and Every ONE institution. Important Discussion on the Reform of the Security Council for
Ongoing Have Been Quite Some Time. Belgium Hopes The Negotiation Will soon lead to concrete results. Mister President, Distinguished
Delegates, I Have talked about institutions. Concerns about institutions are Legitimate. Purpose THEY "should never make us forget thats
the first of accountability created by Mankind Is not abstractions, goal by The Face of a Person in Need said. By the man, woman or
child That Is The Victims of Violence. By Those Who Suffer from violence from nature. Yet violence from Other Men. When It Comes
to Humanitarian protection and aid, Responsibility and accountability are never Needed more. That's Why UN Peacekeeping Missions
With strong mandates, Especially in the Field of Protection of Civilians are important and Should Be Given The Necessary instruments,
not The Least In The Context Of The Fight Against Sexual Violence. In this context, Belgium Strongly supports UN Resolution 1325 and
Its goals of Participation, Protection and Promotion of Women in Peace and Security. The concept of Sovereignty Can not Be Used as a
justification for human rights violations of Citizens Against Any Country. On the Contrary, Sovereignty Implies the "Responsibility to
Protect". We Support The Effort Of The Secretary-General to put this principle "Further Into practice.
Click here to read more »
23 September 2010
General Debate 65th UN General Assembly
Statement by H.E. Mr. Steven Vanackere, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Belgium
Distinguished delegates,
History shows that words can change the image of the world. It proves that words can influence the future. But only when they exceed
the point of declaration. What is our "global governance" if it does not go beyond? Beyond the formulation of goals and intentions? The
words are not effective if the actions do not follow. We must act. I say "we, the nations, united way, for no country, however great he
is only able to respond to major challenges facing humanity. I say we, because no major problem is not confined to one country, not
touching the lives of those who live elsewhere. The obligation to act is a global responsibility and shared.
That Is Why my message today Is About Increased Responsibility and accountability. At the Heart of "any form of governance
responsibility" lies. Be it global or local, national or international. Goal This Is Not Enough. Indeed, only about governance is Not
Behaving Responsibly, it est également about Being Accountable. This fixe at The Level Of The single state, goal aussi At The level of
"our United Nations". Human Rights, Security and Development are At The Core Of The mandate of the United Nations. Secretary
General Kofi Annan form Already Pointed At The Fact That The Three are inextricably linked When He Said "There Is No Development
Without security, no security Without development, and Both Depends on the respect for human rights and the Rule of Law. . Indeed it
has Become Common Knowledge That human rights are protected Unlikely To Be In An insecure environment and Underdeveloped
Economic Development And That Can not Be Sustained durably in a Society Where There Is No rule of law.
The creation of A Women Is A welcome development. It has my country's full support. Of race, gender Will Need to stay a mainstream
theme Influencing The action of Each and Every ONE institution. Important Discussion on the Reform of the Security Council for
Ongoing Have Been Quite Some Time. Belgium Hopes The Negotiation Will soon lead to concrete results. Mister President, Distinguished
Delegates, I Have talked about institutions. Concerns about institutions are Legitimate. Purpose THEY "should never make us forget thats
the first of accountability created by Mankind Is not abstractions, goal by The Face of a Person in Need said. By the man, woman or
child That Is The Victims of Violence. By Those Who Suffer from violence from nature. Yet violence from Other Men. When It Comes
to Humanitarian protection and aid, Responsibility and accountability are never Needed more. That's Why UN Peacekeeping Missions
With strong mandates, Especially in the Field of Protection of Civilians are important and Should Be Given The Necessary instruments,
not The Least In The Context Of The Fight Against Sexual Violence. In this context, Belgium Strongly supports UN Resolution 1325 and
Its goals of Participation, Protection and Promotion of Women in Peace and Security. The concept of Sovereignty Can not Be Used as a
justification for human rights violations of Citizens Against Any Country. On the Contrary, Sovereignty Implies the "Responsibility to
Protect". We Support The Effort Of The Secretary-General to put this principle "Further Into practice.
Click here to read more »
TRANSLATED FROM FRENCH BY GOOGLE TRANSLATE
30/03/2010
Annual report 2009
The complaints filed this year raise three major concerns:
- Unequal treatment: Efforts to modernise the administrative authorities do not take sufficient account of the unequal access of citizens to
new technologies. Some discrimination results from the regulations themselves. At times, they are the last trace of a past society…
- The administrative authorities at times fail to comply with the law themselves: When the regulations are inadequate to deal with new or
unforeseen situations, the administrative authorities take initiatives on occasion that depart from the law without waiting for the
recommended reforms to enter into force – with unacceptable consequences for the fundamental rights of the citizens.
- The citizens expect greater proactivity and communication from the administrative authorities when they do not succeed in honouring
their commitments: The automation and rationalization of procedures, as well as the multiple number of intervening parties in certain
procedures, do not leave enough room for dialogue between the administrative authorities and the citizens.
The total number of new case files in 2009 amounted to 6,500. This is the highest number of new files registered since the office of the
Federal Ombudsman was created thirteen years ago. It is worth noting a slight increase in the proportion of requests for information in
2009.
This year, the institution made 8 recommendations to the administrative authorities and submitted 4 recommendations to Parliament.
Click here to read more »
30/03/2010
Annual report 2009
The complaints filed this year raise three major concerns:
- Unequal treatment: Efforts to modernise the administrative authorities do not take sufficient account of the unequal access of citizens to
new technologies. Some discrimination results from the regulations themselves. At times, they are the last trace of a past society…
- The administrative authorities at times fail to comply with the law themselves: When the regulations are inadequate to deal with new or
unforeseen situations, the administrative authorities take initiatives on occasion that depart from the law without waiting for the
recommended reforms to enter into force – with unacceptable consequences for the fundamental rights of the citizens.
- The citizens expect greater proactivity and communication from the administrative authorities when they do not succeed in honouring
their commitments: The automation and rationalization of procedures, as well as the multiple number of intervening parties in certain
procedures, do not leave enough room for dialogue between the administrative authorities and the citizens.
The total number of new case files in 2009 amounted to 6,500. This is the highest number of new files registered since the office of the
Federal Ombudsman was created thirteen years ago. It is worth noting a slight increase in the proportion of requests for information in
2009.
This year, the institution made 8 recommendations to the administrative authorities and submitted 4 recommendations to Parliament.
Click here to read more »
TRANSLATED FROM FRENCH BY GOOGLE TRANSLATE
Sport and Racism: too little effort by the FRA
28/10/2010
The Agency for Fundamental Rights of the European Union (FRA) today released a report on racism and discrimination (and exclusion)
of people of foreign origin in the sport. The results of this survey will be discussed at the 16th European Congress "Fair Play" currently
taking place in Prague.
The report notes that discrimination in the world of sport remains little known and fought. The focus to date has been on racist incidents
that are made by spectators, mostly in the high performance sports (particularly football). Other forms of discrimination, present every
day in other disciplines and at other levels of practice, are subject to less attention.
According to the report, Belgium is among the few states whose organization promoting equality (in this case the Center for Equal
Opportunity and the Fight against Racism) has intervened in cases of discrimination in the sport, including through the courts. It is also
one of the few states whose football federation has taken action on racist incidents, as well as Finland and Germany. These efforts are
still insufficient.
Note in this context that the Centre has treated in 2009, nearly 20 cases of alleged discrimination in sport. Most relate to the foreign
origin of victims. These records also show, as stated in the FRA report, problems with local sports clubs. If they are less publicized than
racist incidents in football (see attached statement), these cases of discrimination are far from exceptional.
FRA recommends that States ensure better monitoring and recording acts of discrimination in sport. It also calls for an up-to-work more
efficient and vigorous anti-discrimination measures. These include anti-discrimination clauses to match the times in the statutes or
regulations of sports federations to disciplinary action. It is also to stimulate and support advocacy.
Click here to read more>>
Sport and Racism: too little effort by the FRA
28/10/2010
The Agency for Fundamental Rights of the European Union (FRA) today released a report on racism and discrimination (and exclusion)
of people of foreign origin in the sport. The results of this survey will be discussed at the 16th European Congress "Fair Play" currently
taking place in Prague.
The report notes that discrimination in the world of sport remains little known and fought. The focus to date has been on racist incidents
that are made by spectators, mostly in the high performance sports (particularly football). Other forms of discrimination, present every
day in other disciplines and at other levels of practice, are subject to less attention.
According to the report, Belgium is among the few states whose organization promoting equality (in this case the Center for Equal
Opportunity and the Fight against Racism) has intervened in cases of discrimination in the sport, including through the courts. It is also
one of the few states whose football federation has taken action on racist incidents, as well as Finland and Germany. These efforts are
still insufficient.
Note in this context that the Centre has treated in 2009, nearly 20 cases of alleged discrimination in sport. Most relate to the foreign
origin of victims. These records also show, as stated in the FRA report, problems with local sports clubs. If they are less publicized than
racist incidents in football (see attached statement), these cases of discrimination are far from exceptional.
FRA recommends that States ensure better monitoring and recording acts of discrimination in sport. It also calls for an up-to-work more
efficient and vigorous anti-discrimination measures. These include anti-discrimination clauses to match the times in the statutes or
regulations of sports federations to disciplinary action. It is also to stimulate and support advocacy.
Click here to read more>>
| Click map for larger view |
| Click flag for Country Report |
Albert II
King since 9 August 1993
King since 9 August 1993
Phillipe
Prince and Heir Apparent
since 9 August 1993
Prince and Heir Apparent
since 9 August 1993
| TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS |
None reported.
