Belgium’s Constitutional Court has delivered a major setback to the De Wever government’s restrictive migration agenda, issuing a ruling that immediately suspends several key provisions of the 18 July 2025 law that tightened family-reunification conditions for foreigners holding subsidiary protection status. The court’s judgment—publicly released on 26 July 2026—found that the new two-year waiting period, the mandatory proof of adequate income and housing, and the €200 administrative levy imposed on applicants violate both Belgium’s Constitution and EU Directive 2003/86 on the right to family reunification. The contested law was intended to align the treatment of subsidiary-protection holders with that of recognised refugees, but migration-law NGOs argued that the additional hurdles risked leaving spouses and children stranded in conflict zones for years. In its 64-page ruling, the court agreed, stressing that family unity is a "fundamental right whose core cannot be made illusory by disproportionate procedural barriers." The judges noted that the government had failed to provide reliable evidence that the stricter rules were necessary to curb abuse or protect public finances. Practically, the suspension means Belgian consulates must revert to the previous, more lenient rules with immediate effect. Applicants will no longer need to wait two years before filing and will be exempt from demonstrating minimum income if the sponsor already receives recognised protection in Belgium. According to the Immigration Office, around 1,600 pending applications—many originating from Syria, Afghanistan and Eritrea—will now be reassessed under the old framework, potentially accelerating their processing by several months. For employers and mobility managers, the decision removes considerable uncertainty for foreign staff whose relatives were caught in the procedural limbo. International schools and housing providers in Brussels and Antwerp, who had been bracing for a smaller intake of dependants this autumn, can also expect demand to rebound. However, the government is likely to respond; State Secretary for Asylum and Migration Anneleen Van Bossuyt said she is "examining legislative alternatives" that comply with the ruling while "maintaining an efficient migration policy." Any new bill will need to navigate a tight parliamentary calendar ahead of the 2027 elections and pass EU proportionality checks. The case underscores a broader EU trend: several member states that toughened family-reunification criteria after the 2015 refugee crisis are facing legal challenges grounded in the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Belgium’s experience illustrates the limits of national discretion when EU free-movement principles and human-rights obligations intersect. Mobility professionals should monitor follow-up legislation closely; although today’s judgment restores legal certainty, it is unlikely to be the last word on Belgium’s evolving migration landscape.
Source: The Intelligent
