Belgium's Migration Minister Anneleen Van Bossuyt (N-VA) has found herself in the middle of a storm in recent days after continuing the country's new strict asylum policies despite the Constitutional Court's recent suspension of the rules.
Using a crisis law, Van Bossuyt brought in stricter measures whcih entered into force last summer allowing the rejection of asylum seekers who have previously been granted asylum in another EU country, particularly by limiting their right to assistance.
Belgium's Constitutional Court suspended this regulation in February following a complaint from asylum seekers themselves. The Court has not yet ruled on the merits of the case, but has asked the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) whether EU law allows for such a regulation in Belgium.
Contacted by The Brussels Times, Van Bossuyt's office emphasised that she respects the Constitutional Court ruling but that she would still continue her policy, as "there is existing Belgian legislation that provides a legal basis for continuing this policy."
"We will, of course, make use of these legal options," she said. "The pressure on our society and on the ground is immense. I am not going to stand by and watch people abuse our asylum and reception system."
'Flagrant disrespect'
In an open letter published by Le Soir, several professors and lecturers in constitutional law denounced the continuation of the policy, stating that it was in "flagrant disregard of the ruling by the Constitutional Court."
To justify Van Bossuyt's decision to continue the policy, her cabinet referred to another legal basis, other than the one suspended by the Court: a section of Belgium's reception law that states that asylum reception agency Fedasil "may limit or, in exceptional cases, withdraw the right to material assistance" if an asylum seeker "has made a subsequent application, until the decision on admissibility has been taken."
According to the letter's signatories, however, that argument is "a smokescreen" and "does not stand up to scrutiny," because the minister is not taking account of the reasons underlying the suspension, namely that the immediate application of the law is likely to cause serious and irreparable harm to the applicants.
Asylum seekers waiting in front of the 'Petit Chateau' Fedasil registration centre for asylum seekers in Brussels. Credit: Belga
They also pointed out that this is not the first breach of the rule of law; in 2023, then-State Secretary Nicole de Moor (CD&V) did not comply with the Council of State's suspension of her decision to no longer temporarily accommodate single men in the Fedasil reception network.
Still, thousands of court decisions ordering the State to provide reception facilities remain unenforced. As a result, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) condemned Belgium's approach, calling it a "systemic failure" and a "clear refusal to comply with the orders of the domestic court."
With Van Bossuyt's continuation, however, the letter argues that "a new red line has been crossed."
'Same as Donald Trump'
Constitutional law specialist at the University of Antwerp, Patricia Popelier, also finds Van Bossuyt's actions remarkable. "At the same time, I'm not surprised. This is yet another instance of the Minister for Asylum and Migration disregarding a court ruling," she told De Standaard.
"Everyone is talking about what Donald Trump is doing in the United States, but this is exactly the same. In a constitutional state, everyone, including ministers, must comply with court rulings," she said.
"You cannot simply ignore them and say: I am not listening, because I know better. If we no longer agree on that, there is no longer a constitutional state," Popelier said.
She does not consider Van Bossuyt's reliance on existing legislation to continue refusing shelter to asylum seekers with previous protection to be a mitigating factor. "If there are legal arguments, she should have submitted them to the Constitutional Court. The Court is a deliberative forum. The minister is part of the debate."
Popelier pointed out that Van Bossuyt can still submit her legal arguments before the ruling on the merits. While that ruling normally takes place within three months, the court already indicated that it would not meet that deadline because it often takes longer for the European Court of Justice to formulate an opinion – meaning there is no real deadline now.
Minister of Asylum and Migration, Social Integration and Major Cities Anneleen Van Bossuyt (N-VA), Thursday 05 June 2025. Credit: Belga/Nicolas Maeterlinck
On 12 June, the European Migration Pact will enter into force, Van Bossuyt said.
"This will give us even more explicit powers to tackle asylum and reception shopping," she added. "However, I am not going to waste any time and will continue to pursue our policy unabated and on a legally sound basis.’
In February, the Constitutional Court also suspended the stricter rules on family reunification for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. Van Bossuyt has not yet found an alternative with a valid legal basis for this.
According to her office, this only concerns 2% of cases, so the stricter rules will continue to apply to the remaining 98%.
