Belgium takes a new step in tightening its migration policy. After ten hours of particularly tense debates, the Chamber of Representatives adopted on Friday, November 6, a bill authorizing law enforcement to enter private residences to apprehend certain individuals in irregular situations. Defended by the Minister of Asylum and Migration, Anneleen Van Bossuyt, this reform is presented as a « historic » advance by its supporters. It targets foreigners subject to a removal order, refusing to cooperate with their deportation and considered a threat to public order or national security. The text was supported by the governing coalition parties, as well as by the Anders liberals, despite opposition from Francophone socialists, ecologists, and the radical left. Its adoption comes amid a particularly unstable political climate, marked by the government crisis around Prime Minister Bart De Wever.
Specifically, the reform will allow the police, with prior authorization from an investigating judge, to enter a residence even without the consent of its occupants. Interventions may take place between 5 a.m. and 9 p.m., with the possibility of using a locksmith if necessary. The measure may also concern the home of a person hosting a foreigner targeted by a removal order. The government emphasizes, however, the regulated nature of these operations, which must be a last resort solution when other means of apprehension have failed. For Anneleen Van Bossuyt, the goal is primarily to give authorities the means to enforce administrative decisions already made. The measure therefore does not automatically concern all undocumented individuals but a category meeting several cumulative conditions.
A controversial reform deeply dividing Belgium
The adoption of the text provoked a strong reaction from human rights defense associations and part of the opposition. Several demonstrations were organized in Brussels and other Belgian cities to denounce a potential violation of the inviolability of the home and respect for private life. Opponents fear notably that the notion of threat to public order, considered insufficiently precise, allows too broad an interpretation of situations justifying police intervention. Some activists drew a parallel with the methods of the U.S. federal immigration police, ICE, a comparison firmly rejected by the Belgian government. Magistrates also expressed reservations about the role assigned to investigating judges, traditionally responsible for criminal investigations, while these operations will concern the execution of administrative decisions.
This reform is part of a broader desire by Belgian authorities to strengthen the enforcement of removal obligations. A similar initiative had already been considered in 2017 before being abandoned due to political and associative opposition. Nearly ten years later, its adoption marks an important evolution of the Belgian legal framework, even if its implementation remains subject to necessary legal formalities. For supporters of the text, the challenge is to avoid certain expulsion decisions remaining unenforced due to lack of intervention means. For its detractors, the risk is to weaken fundamental guarantees attached to the home and place persons hosting migrants in a situation of legal insecurity. Beyond Belgium, this decision illustrates the tensions crossing several European countries between the desire to strengthen removal policies and the protection of individual freedoms.
Respond to the article
Be the first to comment on this article.