Editorial of the president | 31 march 2023

Dear colleagues,?

If time is of the essence, then the current situation of the Brussels court of appeals is a real denial of justice.?

This was the assessment made by all the participants of the round table organized on March 22nd by the Belgian College of the Royal Academy of Science, Letters and Fine Arts of Belgium and our bar association as part of a series of conferences called “Justice in Truth” on the issue of the crisis of the judicial institution in Brussels.

This issue is not new : the problem has been raised year after year, in official speeches and reports, and I even feel like saying, by all ministers of justice in a row.

It is not only due to a historical backlog. It is expanding and worsening.

It suffices to look at the realities of the judicial system in Brussels to realize that the judicial framework does not take these realities into account at all. Brussels is a regional, federal, and European capital and thereby, litigation in Brussels is not quite the same as elsewhere. Brussels hosts several courts holding exclusive jurisdiction, and foreign-related cases are more numerous… 30% of the courts of assizes sessions are held in Brussels. Brussels alone handles 50% of the cases of the Federal Prosecutor's Office, not to mention the frequent out of the ordinary trials that draw on the available resources in an excessive manner.

Today, 15,000 cases are waiting to be scheduled for pleadings at the Brussels court of appeals, and according to an audit carried out by the Superior Council of Justice, twenty-four additional judges would be needed to clear the backlog.?

What measures would have to be taken? The real ones. The ones that would structurally and sustainably solve the backlog crisis.?

Discussions. Reflections. Seminars. New discussions. Not to mention the major project of measuring the workload of the judges, which has been going on, for how long now?

There is no doubt that the issue is complex. It probably calls for a comprehensive response that would include a reorganization of the courts, a thoughtful but bold adaptation of procedural rules, an improvement of the writing of the laws and regulations – too many of them are needlessly complex or exhaustive, are obscure or simply poorly drafted – and daring judges and lawyers willing to review – without betraying their oath –their way of working in order to adapt to a constantly evolving world.

But who would challenge the fact that this will not suffice, not until our leaders will have fully realized that the judiciary remains structurally underfunded, that justice is not a public service like another one, and that justice, in its essence, is closer to craftsmanship than industry?

It would be indecent to continue to rely solely on a feeling for the general interest and the courage of the judges to meet this challenge, that touches upon the fundamental need of each person to have the State effectively guarantee his/her rights.

Yours sincerely,

The president,

Emmanuel Plasschaert