A recent controversy involving a West Flanders lawyer and a public prosecutor has drawn attention to professional conduct within Belgium’s legal community. The dispute, which dates back to a conversation in January last year, only became public after allegations of exam fraud surfaced. On 2025-05-13 20:03:00, details emerged about a tense phone call that has since triggered disciplinary proceedings.
- Conversation occurred before fraud discovery
- Advocate accused prosecutor of verbal abuse
- Prosecutor blamed advocate for son's condition
- Advocate recorded call as evidence
- Court initially rejected recording due to rules
- Appeal court allowed recording for dignity protection
During the call on 29 January 2024, the prosecutor reportedly used harsh language, calling the lawyer “boertig, onderkruipsel, slinks” and blaming her for his son’s mental health issues. He also pressured her to terminate the internship contract with his son. This incident has sparked debate about boundaries and professionalism in the Belgian legal system.
What does this mean for the integrity of legal practice in Belgium? The case highlights challenges in balancing personal grievances with ethical standards, especially when sensitive recordings are involved. The next section offers a quick summary of the situation for Belgian readers.
How should the legal profession handle such disputes without compromising ethics? The use of recorded conversations, despite being initially rejected, was later accepted on appeal, showing the complexity of privacy versus accountability. Key points include:
- The prosecutor’s verbal accusations and pressure on the lawyer.
- The lawyer’s decision to record the call as evidence, initially disallowed under the Codex Deontologie.
- The appellate court’s ruling prioritizing judicial dignity over privacy concerns.
- The broader implications for legal ethics and workplace relationships in Belgium.
As the investigation progresses, Belgian legal professionals and observers alike will watch closely. Will this case prompt reforms in handling internal conflicts and evidence gathering? Only time will tell, but maintaining trust and integrity remains paramount.
