Kunnen Charleroi's auto's binnenkort nog meer parkeerovertredingen detecteren?

Charleroi is examining whether its scan cars could help identify and sanction certain parking offences beyond unpaid parking, Mayor Thomas Dermine has confirmed, according to La Dernière Heure. No extension has yet been approved, and the city has not disclosed which offences would be covered, when the system might begin operating or whether every automated alert would require validation by a police officer.

The distinction matters immediately for people who drive, walk or use a wheelchair in Belgium’s largest Walloon city. Scan cars already compare number plates with digital records to check whether drivers have paid or possess a valid parking entitlement. Using the same cameras to address obstructive or unlawful parking would move the system closer to road-traffic enforcement, where the identity and legal authority of the person establishing an offence become decisive.

The proposal responds to what the mayor presents as growing incivility by motorists. Its practical appeal is clear: a mobile camera can survey far more streets than an officer on foot and could direct attention towards vehicles blocking pavements, crossings or other sensitive spaces. The Walloon administration’s mobility centre explains that scan cars can inspect as many as 1,200 vehicles an hour, but stresses that they do not themselves issue penalties. Images pass to a central system, where an authorised person must assess the evidence and establish any finding.

That safeguard is central to the project’s feasibility. A parking charge for failing to pay is not the same legal instrument as a fine for breaching traffic rules. Belgian police guidance says municipal or private controllers may monitor paid and time-limited parking, while traffic-code offences such as parking on a pavement or pedestrian crossing require intervention by the police or another legally qualified official. Charleroi must therefore determine whether its cars would merely flag suspected offences for police review or form part of a more integrated enforcement process.

The city already has much of the underlying infrastructure. A public contract published through the EU’s procurement portal sought a system supporting at least two scan cars operating simultaneously, handheld tools for inspectors, parking-management software and statistical analysis. Charleroi’s autonomous municipal agency, the Régie Communale Autonome, also described its Smartscan data as a way to produce a more objective picture of parking use and help redesign local rules. The technology is therefore established; the proposed change concerns what authorities may lawfully do with its images and data.

Two Belgian perspectives pull the debate in different directions. Dermine’s administration frames better observation and enforcement as a response to behaviour that makes public space less safe or accessible. The local branch of the Workers’ Party of Belgium, PTB Charleroi, has instead denounced what it calls the city’s “tout au scan-car” approach, arguing that parking enforcement is punitive, socially unfair and too closely tied to municipal revenue. That objection predates the latest proposal but directly challenges the case for expanding the system.

Disability organisations add a separate warning about automated certainty. Belgium’s National Superior Council for Persons with Disabilities has said scan cars can wrongly target holders of disability parking cards because a card displayed behind a windscreen is not automatically linked to the number plate being scanned. Charleroi has previously used registered plate data to analyse parking by disabled users, yet any broader enforcement regime would still need accessible registration, human verification and a workable challenge procedure.

The wider European connection is regulatory rather than geopolitical. Number plates, photographs, timestamps and precise locations are personal data when they can be linked to an individual, bringing municipal processing within Belgian and EU data-protection rules. Charleroi’s current parking regulation says such information may be collected by an inspector or scan car and retained through recovery and appeal procedures. A new purpose would require a clear legal basis, defined access rights and proportionate retention.

The next meaningful step is therefore not the arrival of more camera cars but publication of the operating model. Residents should watch for a formal decision by the municipal college or council, consultation with Charleroi police and the municipal agency, a data-protection assessment, and an exact list of offences. Until those elements appear, the plan remains an option under examination rather than a new enforcement rule.