Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde

The area of the arrondissement of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (light red, blue and dark red) belongs to both the Province of Flemish Brabant (grey, blue and dark red) and the Brussels-Capital Region (light red). The Flemish Brabant is made of the arrondissement of Leuven (grey) and of a large part of Brussels-Hal-Vilvoorde (dark red and blue). The dark red areas are Flemish municipalities with language facilities for French-speakers.

All Belgian electoral areas are provinces, with the exception of BHV and Leuven in the province of Flemish Brabant

“Brussels judicial Arrondissement” redirects here.

Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (often abbreviated as BHV) is a Belgian electoral and judicial arrondissement (the judicial arrondissement being unambiguously better known as the Brussels judicial Arrondissement, after the location of its main courts) in the center of the country, encompassing:

• the officially bilingual (French and Dutch) Brussels-Capital Region, which coincides with the administrative arrondissement of Brussels-Capital
• the officially monolingual Dutch-speaking area around it, Halle-Vilvoorde, which in turn coincides with the administrative Halle-Vilvoorde administrative Arrondissement. This area contains several municipalities with language facilities, i.e. municipalities where French-speaking people form a considerable part of the population and therefore have extra rights.

All Belgian electoral arrondissements coincide with the Belgian provinces except for Flemish Brabant which is divided into this arrondissement, i.e. Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde, and the Arrondissement of Leuven.

Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde arrondissement has been the subject of a highly sensitive dispute within Belgium. The Flemish want to split it into two arrondissements (like the administrative ones), while the Francophones want to keep it as is or, at a minimum, split it with concessions.

The lists for the federal and European elections are composed of both Dutch and French-language parties (in all other electoral areas it is either Dutch or French-language parties), while the area is partly monolingual Halle-Vilvoorde and bilingual Brussels. Consequently:

• French-speakers living in monolingual Dutch-speaking Halle-Vilvoorde can vote for French-language parties; whereas
• Dutch-speakers living in monolingual French-speaking Walloon Brabant cannot vote for Dutch-language parties.

This is discrimination according to the Flemish.¹

Background history: state reforms

Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde judicial and electoral arrondissement has existed since the Belgian Revolution in 1830, when the country was created as a unitary state. At that time, French was the only political language. Belgium, as a unitary state, consisted of 9 provinces with several electoral arrondissements. One of these provinces was Brabant, which consisted of the arrondissements of BHV, Leuven and Nivelles. In the course of history, the administrative and political situation in Belgium has changed considerably and BHV has grown to become a major exception within the contemporary federal state of Belgium.

Linguistic status of municipalities (1920s-1960s)

The municipalities with language facilities near Brussels

Dynamic system

In 1921 Belgium was divided into two monolingual entities (French-speaking Wallonia and Dutch-speaking Flanders) with municipalities belonging to either one of them since 1932. The Belgian law of June 28, 1932, 'on the use of languages for administrative matters' based the language status of every Belgian municipality on the decennial linguistic census.² The criterion to belong to the Flemish or Walloon language area was the attainment of a threshold of 50%; whereas, over 30% the municipal authorities had to offer services in the minority language as well.² A municipality could ask the government to change its linguistic status by a royal decree only after a census would have shown a passage over the 30% or 50% threshold.

This dynamic system and the census results (disputed by the Flemish) led to Flemish monolingual municipalities around Brussels becoming bilingual, which was seem by Flemings as an attack on their cultural territory. Brussels was indeed mainly French speaking, and its rural surroundings slowly underwent urban sprawl. Flemish politicians started opposing the linguistic census. The last census, taken in 1947 but only published in 1954, resulted in 3 municipalities gaining bilingual status. There was no following census, as Flemish mayors unconstitutionally boycotted the 1960 census, since previous census results were disputed.

Static system

A deal was struck in 1963, during the Lefèvre-Spaak government; that the language border would be officially fixed and would not be changed.³ This was to offset Flemish fears of uninterrupted growth of the already predominantly French-speaking urban agglomeration into the surrounding Flemish countryside.

The dynamic system was abolished, replaced with a static system, i.e. the linguistic status of municipalities was fixed. Bilingual Brussels would be limited to 19 municipalities. In the Flemish Halle and Vilvoorde areas surrounding Brussels, six municipalities with between 30% and 50% French speakers (as determined by the latest linguistic census from 1947) would be granted extended linguistic and political facilities. The French-speaking parliamentarians tried to add them to Brussels, which was fiercely resisted by the unanimous Flemish parliamentarians. The same arrangement was made for a number of municipalities on the border between Wallonia and Flanders, where local linguistic minorities (above 30% at the census that had preceded their determining) could enjoy identical facilities.

Though officially agreed and effected, this compromise led to bitter resentment by both communities and did much to fuel the rise of extreme parties. For example, in 1964, the FDF was created, a party advocating the extension of Brussels.³

Creation of communities, regions and splitting of Brabant (1970s-1990s)

In 1970, the Dutch, French and German Cultural Communities were created. The constitutional revision of 1970 also laid the foundations for the establishment of three Regions.⁴

Later on, in 1980, the Cultural Communities became known as Communities. Also two regions were established: the Flemish Region and the Walloon Region. Although the creation of a Brussels Region was provided for in 1970, the Brussels-Capital Region was not established until a later reform.⁴

Former province of Brabant within Belgium (Flemish Brabant: bright yellow; Walloon Brabant: bright red)

The province of Brabant had been one of the nine provinces of Belgium. But due to the arrangement of the linguistic border, which passes through this province, the province was abolished after several reforms:

In 1989 Brussels-Capital Region was created, but the region was still part of the province of Brabant.

With the reform in 1993 making Belgium into a federal state, Brabant became part of all three regions: the Brussels, Flemish and Walloon Region.

Until 1995, the province of Brabant contained the following electoral arrondissements:

• the Dutch-speaking electoral arrondissement of Leuven (coinciding with the administrative arrondissement of Leuven)
• the French-speaking electoral arrondissement of Nivelles (coinciding with the administrative arrondissement of Nivelles)
• the electoral arrondissement of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (coinciding with both the administrative arrondissement Brussels-Capital and Halle-Vilvoorde).

In 1995, this province was split into:

• the province of Flemish Brabant
• the province of Walloon Brabant (which coincides to the arrondissement of Nivelles)
• Brussels-Capital Region, an own bilingual region (the other two regions being Flanders and Wallonia)

However, the arrondissements stayed the same.

Elections of 2003

New electoral districts

For the elections in 2003, new electoral districts were created based on the provinces instead of arrondissements, because the electoral areas were too small. With regards to Brussels and the arrondissements of the province of Flemish Brabant the old arrondissements (Leuven and BHV) were retained (Walloon Brabant has only one arrondissement, so this is in fact also retained), since the French-speakers are against splitting BHV.⁵

BHV is declared unconstitutional

In 2003, one week after the election, the Arbitration Court (Dutch: Arbitragehof, French: Cour d'Arbitrage) — now the Constitutional Court — declared the new election law unconstitutional.⁶ It judged that, among other things, the definition of the electoral arrondissement Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde for national and European elections is a violation of the non-discrimination principle between Belgians, taken in combination with articles 1 through 5 of the Constitution (especially article 4, defining the language areas).

However, it left open the precise nature of any solution, and thus did not demand the splitting of the electoral district, but neither did it allow it to be kept as it is now.

Nevertheless, the Court declared the results of the then-complete 2003 elections (held under the law declared unconstitutional) to be valid, to avoid having to redo the elections.

The court however did not rule on all aspects of constitutionality. Among other things, it did not rule on the fact that some French-speakers now enjoy de facto rights that Flemings don't. This applies mainly to the fact that a French-speaker from Brussels who moves into a commune in the Flemish Region can still continue to vote for his French-speaking Brussels candidates, whereas a Fleming who moves into the (equally) monolingual Walloon Region cannot vote any longer for his Flemish candidates of choice from the two regions where Dutch is an official language (Flemish Region and Brussels Region).¹

A minor discrimination is that French-speaking candidates from Brussels can compete for votes in a part of Flanders without being subject to the entire valid legislation (only to the Belgian laws, but not to the Flemish laws applicable in Flemish region), whereas Flemish candidates in the Walloon Region always have to obey both Belgian and regional/community legislation.

BHV in the news

Following the ruling of the Constitutional Court, after having remained unsolved after decades, the BHV issue was suddenly a hot topic. With the elections for the Flemish Parliament in 2004, all Flemish parties added to their programs the demand to split BHV. In the Flemish coalition agreement of 2004, the issue was included as "to be realised immediately",⁷ signed by the three large Flemish parties CD&V, VLD and SP.A, in addition to the Flemish-nationalist N-VA (the at that time CD&V cartel partner) and the left-liberal Spirit (the at that time SP.A cartel partner). Although the Flemish government or the Flemish parliament have no legal power concerning the case, the issue was seen as a commitment of the then governing parties at a federal level, VLD and SP.A, to settle the case in the federal government.

Current arrangements and organisation in BHV

Concerning the electoral arrondissement

Elections of the Senate and of the European Parliament

Electors can choose between the lists competing for seats in the Dutch-speaking electoral college and for those running for seats in the French-speaking electoral college, whereas in other electoral arrondissements, electors can only vote on the list of the language area they live in.

Elections of the Chamber

Because the former arrondissements still exist in Brabant (see the previous section(s) for more information) there is a special arrangement for the provinces of Flemish and Walloon Brabant: for the allocation of seats between the party lists on the level of the former province of Brabant, lists can be combined between Leuven and Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (Dutch-speaking parties do this) or between Nivelles and Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (French-speaking parties do this). This practice is known in French as apparentement and in Dutch as apparentering.

Voters can choose between candidates from both Flemish and Walloon parties (in all other electoral areas it is either Flemish or Walloon parties), although the area is partly monolingual Halle-Vilvoorde (belonging to the Flemish Community) and bilingual Brussels (belonging to both communities), and consequently French-speakers living in monolingual Dutch-speaking Halle-Vilvoorde can vote for French-language parties, whereas Dutch-speakers living in monolingual French-speaking Walloon Brabant (equal to the former electoral arrondissement of Nivelles) cannot vote for Dutch-language parties.

This is discrimination according to the Flemish.¹ The Flemish want to split BHV, while the French-speaking parties, who are embedded in the French Community and the Brussels and Walloon Regions, are radically opposed to dividing the BHV electoral district. Flemish demands for the area to be split are met with equally stringent demands by the Francophone community for the six special-facility communes to be officially added to Brussels proper. This Francophone demand would create a previously non-existent "corridor" between the French-speaking region of Wallonia and majority French-speaking Brussels, much to the dismay of Flemish politicians.

Belgians who live abroad may choose in which electoral arrondissement they are registered. The majority of the French-speakers abroad do so in BHV, according to N-VA.⁸

Concerning the judicial arrondissement

Since this is one judicial arrondissement, a legal case can be handled by both Dutch-speaking and French-speaking judges. This causes a problem comparable with the electoral situation: Brussels is bilingual, and Halle-Vilvoorde is monolingual Dutch, so it is possible that a French judge is appointed a legal case from the Dutch-speaking Halle-Vilvoorde region, which is unfair from a Flemish point of view. The fact that Brussels has a more extensive court network, for example the Law Courts of Brussels, adds to this issue.

However, splitting BHV could have negative effects for the safety in the area, since criminals based in Brussels (who are mostly French-speaking) often act in the Dutch-speaking area around it, who would have to be judged in Dutch-speaking courts.⁹

Municipalities

Municipalities in the arrondissement (the 19 municipalities of Brussels are displayed as one area).

The arrondissement consists of the following municipalities (in total accounting for around 1,595,000 inhabitants on 1 January 2006¹⁰):

Halle-Vilvoorde

Brussels (names are written in respectively French and Dutch)

Points of view

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2010)

This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this section if you can. (June 2010)

Flemish point of view

Many legal experts in Flanders, such as prof. Paul Van Orshoven and Matthias Storme, argue that there is no way out, other than splitting BHV, that will respect the entire constitution.

On the political level, Flemings argue that French-speakers who choose to live in Flanders should start respecting all Flemish institutions — legislation, parliament, government, official language and territory — and stop requesting an exceptional status (of not having to respect the Flemish institutions that are constitutionally established and internationally recognized). French-speakers would be asked to respect the division of Belgium in four linguistic areas, a division that was democratically approved, with support of many French-speaking members of the Belgian parliament.

The Flemings claim that they only want 'as much' respect for their institutions as is the case everywhere else in the European Union. Moreover, they claim that splitting BHV is also necessary in order to moderate the aggressiveness and intolerance of those French-speakers towards the local and historic Flemish population and their political institutions. This attitude of (part of the) French-speakers probably explains why the local politicians from all Flemish parties are so unanimous in favor of splitting, even the local greens (Groen!) whose position was, for long, the contrary of the national position of Groen! Recently, even groen!, the least pro-Flemish of all Flemish political parties, appears to become more insistent on favoring a split, preferably negotiated but also otherwise, if necessary.

Francophone point of view

Just as unanimously, at least among the political parties, most French-speaking politicians claim that those French-speakers who live in the Flemish Region should have the right to be treated as a linguistic minority that falls under the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.¹¹ This would then give them a kind of an 'extra-territorial' voting right.

This point of view differs sharply from many French-speaking businessman and academics. 'Beci', a Brussels based employers organisation with 90% membership of French-speaking businessmen, explicitly states it favours respect for all the existing institutions, including the boundaries between the language areas. Similarly, a growing number of French-speaking intellectuals and academics state that French-speakers living in the Flemish region should stop behaving as if they're not in Flanders, and thus vote for the Flemish electoral college.

Philippe Van Parijs, a leading French-speaking philosopher and economist from the UCL also defends strict 'territoriality' and for ending both the linguistic facilities, and the 'extra-territorial' voting rights for French-speakers living in the Flemish Region. In an interview in De Standaard and Le Soir on 23 august 2007, he defended this.

Legal and political considerations

There is a lack of consensus amongst national legal authorities about this subject, as they too seem divided between French and Dutch speakers. The French-speaking Community and the Flemish Community have a different interpretation of the language facilities enjoyed by the French-speaking population in some municipalities.

There are binding rulings (as early as from 1968) from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg — an institution with direct authority in all EU states — that confirm that the recognition of specific minority rights for the French-speakers is to be limited to a very few number of municipalities and to a limited set of public services.

Regular supra-national recommendations from the Council of Europe¹² — a body without direct authority and therefore a lesser status in the legal order in Belgium — expressed concerns in 2002 that the minority of French speakers in Flanders should be recognized and protected as an official linguistic minority, as defined by advise of the Venice Commission. However, other reports from this institution provide arguments to the contrary (e.g. the fact that the francophones in Flanders cannot be regarded as looking back on long-standing and peaceful relations with the Flemish authorities). Also, they cannot be regarded as being "sufficient in numbers" within the Council's definition so as to constitute a linguistic minority within Flanders.

Flemish authorities have stated that the recommendations from the Council of Europe are invalid, as they didn't take into account the Belgian constitution, nor the European jurisprudence that confirms a very limited definition of the 'language facilities'. As such, the Council of Europe and especially its 'rapporteurs', appear to be neglecting the special character of Belgium. It should also be noted that, the French language minority around Brussels is of quite recent origin (see Frenchification of Brussels). There is no 'historic French-speaking minority' in these areas.

Flemings also point to the fact that they already go much further in the actual recognition of minority rights then the French-speakers do. E.g.: Flemish government funds French-speaking schools in municipalities with language facilities in the Flemish Region (as the constitution prescribes for) of around 10 M€ per year. Contrasting sharply with that, the French-Speaking Community and the Walloon Regional government have never accepted that Dutch-speaking schools were established (as the constitution prescribes for) in Walloon municipalities with language facilities in the Walloon Region. As a result, there is no funding at all for Dutch-speaking schools in Wallonia!

Solutions

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2010)

This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this section if you can. (June 2010)

One solution would be to allow the right to every Belgian to vote for the party he wishes to vote for. This is the solution of a 'unitary electoral circonscription' (as favoured by the unitary militant's group Pavia). However, as several Flemish commentators (such as Rik Van Cauwelaert) and experts (such as Matthias Storme, Bart Maddens and Boudewijn Bouckaert) have pointed out, this solution has huge democratic disadvantages. Among others, it would result in a significant transfer of votes from French-speakers living in Brussels and Wallonia towards those candidates and parties in Flanders that are rather hostile towards further Flemish emancipation. The more Flemish-sided parties cannot expect any 'sympathy vote' at all, political observers expect only very few 'sympathy votes'. This would make a parliamentary seat in Flanders 'more expensive' (requiring more votes than today and more than a seat won in Wallonia or Brussels).^{clarification needed} This in its turn is squarely against the 'one man one vote' principle.^{dubious – discuss}

Another, more obvious and probably more democratic solution would be that the electoral districts respect the constitutional boundaries of the language areas. This would result in a Flemish electoral college and a French-speaker's college. In the Walloon Region all voters would vote for the latter, and in the Flemish Region, all voters vote for the former, while in the Brussels Capital Region, they can chose between the two electoral colleges.

Consequences of splitting the electoral arrondissement

If the BHV electoral district were split, the Halle-Vilvoorde electoral area would merge with the Leuven electoral area, forming a provincial constituency in Flemish-Brabant. Inhabitants living in Halle-Vilvoorde - whether they are French-speaking or Dutch speaking - would lose the possibility to vote for politicians from Brussels during the federal elections. In practice, this means:

• that French-speaking parties of HV would need to form one francophone list to be able to gain a seat in the federal parliament and that French-speaking politicians from Brussels would lose votes that they would otherwise gain in the Flemish periphery of Brussels.
• that Dutch-speaking parties in Brussels would need to form one Flemish list to be able to gain a seat in the federal parliament and that Dutch-speaking politicians in HV would lose votes that they would otherwise gain in Brussels.

Negotiations and attempts to split BHV

Government negotiations 2004-2005

In 2005, cabinet ministers and parties had been locked in debate over the future of this electoral district, and long overdue decisions had not been reached.

Compromise solutions have been proposed:

• The BHV electoral district could be joined to the neighbouring Flemish electoral district of Leuven, allowing greater numbers of Dutch speakers a vote in a combined Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde-Leuven district.

• In return for leaving BHV in its current state, one might accomplish Flemish demands for specific powers currently under Federal jurisdiction to be conferred to the Regions.

A deadline of May 11, 2005, by which time a decision was to be reached, has expired with a compromise eluding the negotiators. A compromise worked out by Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt was explicitly opposed by only one coalition partner, namely the Flemish party Spirit. It is believed that this compromise would have entitled the French Community with the right to exercise certain, limited powers over inhabitants of the Flemish Community, in return for the splitting of BHV.

After visiting King Albert II to report the failure of the seven negotiation meetings to reach a successful conclusion, the Prime Minister requested a vote of confidence from the parliament.¹³ The Parliament supported the government on Friday 13th May 2005 and the issue was put on hold until the next general election in 2007.

Federal elections of 2007

With the federal elections of 10 June 2007 looming, the problem of the electoral district of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde reemerged. Because the federal government failed to comply with a ruling of the Court of Arbitration which declared the provincial electoral districts compared to the two remaining arrondisemental ones in the former province of Brabant unconstitutional, several mayors in the Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde area have threatened to refuse to compile the lists of electors.

Professor and constitutional expert Paul Van Orshoven from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven declared that the elections, held on June 10, were unconstitutional. According to Van Orshoven there are two problems:

• As the previous election was held Sunday May 18, 2003, the final date to hold elections (four years from the previous) is Sunday, May 13, 2007
• The Court of Arbitration gave the government the time to fix the B-H-V problem until the next elections were scheduled; in the default case the election results were supposed to be declared void.

As in 2003, several mayors and groupings have called for a boycott of the elections. 24 communes have refused to cooperate in the organization of the elections. In May 2007, the commune Steenokkerzeel launched a court case against the federal government for not complying with the ruling of the Court of Arbitration. The case should have started on May 25, 2007, but the case was mistakenly scheduled in a one-judge court room rather than a three-judge court room and is therefore delayed.¹⁴

2007-2008 Government formation

The problem of BHV became an important issue in the 2007-2008 Belgian government formation. On 7 November 2007, the Flemish-speaking parties voted at the Committee on the Interior of the Chamber of Representatives for the disentanglement, while the French-speaking parties refused to vote and left the room.¹⁵ This situation has never previously occurred in Belgian history. All representatives of the Flemish parties voted in favor of the split of the BHV electoral district, with the exception of Tinne van der Straeten, of Groen!, the Flemish green party, who abstained. This situation shows that the Belgian debate goes far beyond legal quarrels about BHV; as the power of Walloon institutions decrease (and this since its industrial breakdown in the late 1960s), and as the Flemish government clearly consolidates its ideological orientation toward a situation of cultural domination - supported by demographic and financial matters. Every step in the Belgian debate can be interpreted symbolically as a fight between two cultures that will maybe never show mutual respect until they can be somehow protected from each other's domination.

On Sunday 23 December the interim Government officially came into office when it was acknowledged by the lower house of Parliament with 97 votes in favour. The transitional period came to an end on March 20, 2008, when Yves Leterme was sworn in as Prime Minister of the Leterme I Government. Negotiations continued, but again no solution was reached and Leterme offered the King his resignation on 15 July 2008, but the King refused.¹⁶

Federal elections of 2010

The newly appointed Flemish President of the Constitutional Court Marc Bossuyt has stated that future federal elections (i.e. after 2007) would be deemed "unconstitutional" if a legal arrangement for Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde hadn't been put in place by then.¹⁷¹⁸¹⁹

According to Article 65 of the Belgian Constitution, the Federal Parliament ends its term after 4 years which automatically leads to new federal elections within 40 days.²⁰ This means the next federal elections were scheduled for 2011.

In April 2010, the Flemish liberals VLD withdrew themselves from the government because no solution was found for the problem of BHV at the agreed upon date, therefore causing the collapse of the Leterme II Government.²¹ Consequently, new elections had to be set up, resulting in the general elections of June 2010.²²

For these elections, several mayors in Halle-Vilvoorde started a legal procedure because BHV was still not solved, and they refused to organise the elections in their municipalities, as with the previous two federal elections.²³ The province of Flemish Brabant organised the elections instead.²⁴

After these general elections, the next government will have to find a solution for BHV. N-VA, the winner and now largest party of Flanders and Belgium, want to split BHV without concessions for French speakers.²⁵

References

Brussels

This article is part of the series: Politics and government of Brussels

Government Minister-President Charles Picqué Common CC French CC Flemish CC Governor

Parliament 2009 election 2004 election 1999 election 1995 election Building

Parties MR PS Ecolo cdh VLD sp.a VB CD&V Groen! NVA

Municipalities City of Brussels Mayor 18 other

Issues BHV constituency As EU capital  v • d • e

See also

• 2007 Belgian government formation
• Communities, regions and language areas of Belgium
• Municipalities with language facilities
• Politics of Belgium
• Language legislation in Belgium
• Partition of Belgium
• State reform in Belgium
• Frenchification of Brussels
• Irredentism

v • d • e Judicial arrondissements of Belgium Antwerp · Arlon · Bruges · Brussels · Charleroi · Dendermonde · Dinant · Eupen · Ghent · Hasselt · Huy · Kortrijk · Leuven · Liège · Marche-en-Famenne · Mechelen · Mons · Namur · Neufchâteau · Nivelles · Oudenaarde · Tongeren · Tournai · Turnhout · Verviers · Veurne · Ypres