The issue of youth detention and overcrowding in juvenile institutions has come under renewed scrutiny in Belgium. A recent ruling by the Ghent Court of Appeal has ordered the admission of a minor into a closed youth institution, despite earlier release due to lack of space. This decision highlights the ongoing challenges within the Belgian juvenile justice system.
- Jeugdrechter liet minderjarige vrij wegens plaatsgebrek
- Hof van beroep eist opname in instelling
- Jongeman pleegde geweld tegen jeugdopvoeder
- Agentschap Opgroeien biedt geen plaats aan
- Hof benadrukt noodzaak gesloten begeleiding
- Uitvoerende macht draagt verantwoordelijkheid voor uitvoering
On 27 March 2025, a young man threatened a staff member at a closed youth facility in Wingene and inflicted injuries causing incapacitation. Although initially transferred to a community institution in Everberg, a youth judge in Dendermonde deemed further closed supervision necessary. However, the responsible agency did not offer a placement, leading to the minor’s release under strict conditions. The Court of Appeal reversed this, emphasizing the need for secure confinement to protect society.
What does this judgment mean for Belgium’s youth justice system? And how should authorities balance limited resources with public safety? The ruling from 2025-05-27 00:38:00 sets an important precedent that we explore below.
This case raises critical questions about responsibility and resource allocation in youth care. Should lack of institutional space excuse non-compliance with judicial orders? The court’s decision clarifies that:
- Protection of society and victim safety takes precedence over administrative limitations.
- Judges cannot consider institutional capacity as a factor when ordering secure youth detention.
- The execution of such measures is the responsibility of the implementing authorities, not the courts.
- The case exposes systemic issues of overcrowding and underfunding in Belgian youth institutions.
Moving forward, Belgian policymakers must urgently increase investment in youth detention infrastructure and explore alternative measures to ensure both the welfare of minors and the protection of society. Will this ruling prompt meaningful reforms, or will overcrowding continue to hinder justice?
