Seven associations challenge Brussels anti-begging rule at the Council of State
Updated 29 June 2026, 00:00 UTC | Brussels - Seven associations have challenged the City of Brussels' anti-begging regulation before Belgium's Council of State, La DH reported on 11 June 2026.
In 30 seconds
- La DH reported on 11 June 2026 that seven associations brought the Brussels anti-begging regulation to the Council of State.
- The City of Brussels says a common general police regulation for the 19 Brussels communes has applied since 1 April 2024.
- The Brussels regulation allows administrative fines of up to 500 euros for adults and 175 euros for minors, according to the City text.
- Belgium's 2013 municipal sanctions law allows communes to use administrative fines and alternative measures for local rule breaches.
The case concerns a public-order rule described by La DH as an anti-begging regulation. According to La DH, seven associations attaquent reglement anti-mendicite before the , Belgium's highest administrative court. The dispute sits at the intersection of municipal policing, homelessness, poverty policy and the limits of local administrative fines.
Background
Begging itself is no longer treated as a simple criminal offence in modern Belgian public policy, but municipalities use police regulations and municipal administrative sanctions to manage public order. The City of Brussels says its current general police regulation, common to the 19 communes, has been in force since 1 April 2024. The provides the framework for municipal administrative sanctions, including fines, mediation and community service.
What to do
People fined under the contested rule may seek legal advice. Social workers and outreach teams should monitor enforcement practice. City authorities face pressure to show that any public-order response is proportionate and connected to social support.
Impact
Regional — The impact is concentrated in the City of Brussels and the wider Brussels-Capital Region, where public-space rules are shared across several communes through the general police regulation but local enforcement remains politically sensitive.
EvidenceWell established · 1 primary source + 2 official documentsExplore evidence →Hide evidence ↑
- Published:
- 11 Jun 2026, 02:00
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 29 Jun 2026
- Published:
- 1 Apr 2024, 02:00
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 29 Jun 2026
- Published:
- 1 Jul 2013, 02:00
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 29 Jun 2026
Voices & reactions
What the main actors are doing
Reported positions, summarised — not direct quotationsApplicant anti-poverty and rights associations
The seven applicant associations, according to La DH, argue that no fine will put an end to poverty. Their position is that a règlement anti-mendicité ville approach punishes visible poverty instead of addressing housing, income, care and support needs. They frame the case as a rights and social-policy challenge to local enforcement.
City of Brussels public-order authorities
The City of Brussels' published police regulation frames local rules around cleanliness, safety, security and tranquillity in public spaces. Under that framework, municipal authorities use administrative sanctions and alternatives to manage conduct in streets and public places. The available official text does not give a specific response to this Council of State challenge.
The story, connected
Explore the people, places and ideas in this story
Go beyond the headline. Open a card for sourced context, maps, official links and the other subjects connected to this report.
Continue reading
This story was assembled from verified evidence, with its sources and reasoning recorded as it was written.