Skip to main content

Fourth year of the policy of non-reception : more than 10,000 convictions for thebelgian State and still 3,000 people in the street

Posted on 17 March 2025

Doc­tors Without Bor­ders, Méde­cins du Monde, Vluch­te­lin­gen­werk Vlaan­de­ren, the WAX, Bel­Re­fu­gees, Cari­tas Inter­na­tio­nal and the Hub Huma­ni­ta­rian publi­shed the fourth edi­tion of their ‘State of play’ on the poli­cy of non-host and its nega­tive impacts on the applicant·euses asy­lum in Belgium.

The report covers theyear 2024 , and reveals that the applicant·euses d- see­kers (most­ly men) are still denied the pro­tec­tion and the care to which they are legal­ly entit­led, the conse­quence of which was that thou­sands of people became home­less, and nhave only­li­mi­ted access to basic social services.

Thus, huma­ni­ta­rian agen­cies and civil socie­ty cal­ling on the fede­ral govern­ment to put in place poli­cie­son asy­lum and migra­tion com­ply with the law.

Read the report

Des­pite the law’s home in 2007, which defines the basic social ser­vices that theS­tate must offer the applicant·workers ’ inter­na­tio­nal pro­tec­tion, near­ly 3,000 people in need of inter­na­tio­nal pro­tec­tion are for­ced to sleep on the streets, in squats or in make­shift camps in Bel­gium eve­ry month (on ave­rage). men are dis­pro­por­tio­na­te­ly affec­ted, because Feda­sil excludes sys­te­ma­ti­cal­ly net­work ofhome when­they intro­duce an appli­ca­tion fora­sy­lum and place on a list ofwai­ting out­side the legal framework.

The law face up to the reality : 4 major weaknesses

Seve­ral bel­gian courts have orde­red theS­tate and Feda­sil more than 10,000 times in the past three years for non-com­pliance with natio­nal legis­la­tion and inter­na­tio­nal applicant·euses of inter­na­tio­nal pro­tec­tion. Even the euro­pean Court of human rights of the­man denoun­ced the ‘sys­te­mic fai­lure’ of the fede­ral authorities.

Cis why the report com­pares the pro­vi­sions of the law, with the rea­li­ty to which the applicant·euses d- see­kers are facing. The act sti­pu­lates the right ofac­cess to shel­ter, food and clo­thing, health care and psy­cho­so­cial assis­tance, as well as to legal aid and sup­port to thein­te­gra­tion. Howe­ver, men see­king inter­na­tio­nal pro­tec­tion in Bel­gium are very often face serious challenges.

The normalization of the non-reception : a drift unacceptable

Since 2021, the recep­tion cri­sis conti­nues to wor­sen. If migra­tion poli­cies more res­tric­tive are put in place, the situa­tion may become cri­ti­cal in the coming months. Howe­ver, ins­tead of pro­vi­ding sus­tai­nable solu­tions, the coa­li­tion Ari­zo­na now offers a set of ‘mea­sures in res­ponse to the cri­sis’, which will only add to the vio­la­tions of fun­da­men­tal rights. By limi­ting the num­ber of people applying for asy­lum, redu­cing the capa­ci­ty of the home net­work and sla­shing the bud­get of Feda­sil, these deci­sions under­mine not only those in search of pro­tec­tion, but also the rule of law that Bel­gium has to defend. The nor­ma­li­za­tion of the non-host can not become a fatality.

Solu­tions are yet to reach. The most effi­cient way to resolve the cri­sis of the home is a com­mon asy­lum poli­cy and migra­tion more humane and sus­tai­nable, which streng­thens the sys­tem of care. This would ensure that the people see­king refuge in Bel­gium, have access to the care and pro­tec­tion that they are entit­led to, while pro­mo­ting a socie­ty that is more just and inclu­sive for all·tes.

We ask the govern­ment to abide by all deci­sions regar­ding the cri­sis in the­home. This means that :

· Any per­son who is entit­led to the­re­cep­tion must be given a place ofwel­come and the list ofwai­ting to disappear.

· In the mean­time, ofo­ther forms ofas­sis­tance that should be pro­vi­ded, such as finan­cial aid to the CPAS. This was also sug­ges­ted by the courts.

Pre­vious reports :