19
Mar 2026
Belgium’s top court suspended parts of the country’s new asylum law, but the government still plans to move forward with the policy while waiting for the Europe’s highest court to rule.
The dispute is over a law passed in July 2025 that lets Belgium limit support for asylum-seekers who have already received protection in another European Union country.
On February 26, 2026, the Constitutional Court halted the measure and referred key legal questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union, citing concerns that the policy might clash with EU law and could seriously harm migrants.
Migration Minister Anneleen Van Bossuyt said that the government will continue pursuing the policy through other legal avenues.
She argued that Belgium still has room under existing law to implement the approach and expects that the country’s position will get stronger when the EU’s new migration and asylum pact takes effect on June 12.
Court halts key policy
The legal fight began after Belgium introduced sweeping asylum reforms on July 14, 2025.
Under the new law, authorities can classify someone’s asylum application as a “subsequent application” if that person already has refugee status or another type of protection in another EU country.
That classification allows Belgian authorities to restrict or withdraw reception support, including housing and financial assistance.
The Constitutional Court suspended those provisions after finding that limiting support could create serious and potentially irreversible harm for applicants.
Judges agreed that the policy’s legality under EU law is unclear. They referred the question to the EU’s Court of Justice to determine whether someone already protected in one member state can legally be treated as filing a “subsequent application” in another.
The court ruled that the claimants’ legal arguments were strong enough to justify suspending the measures while the EU court examines the issue.
Government defends restrictions
Belgium’s government said that the policy reduces strain on the country’s asylum system and limits what officials describe as “asylum and reception shopping.”
Van Bossuyt claimed that the measures are already producing results.
According to the minister, the number of asylum-seekers arriving in Belgium after receiving protection elsewhere dropped by 83% between September and December 2025 compared with the same period in 2024.
She indicated that the government will keep this approach while awaiting the European court’s guidance.
(Image courtesy of Angel Bena via Pexels)
Legal dispute over EU rules
The central legal question concerns how EU asylum law categorizes applications from people who already hold refugee status or another protection status in another member state.
Belgium’s July 2025 law states that an application filed after a final decision in another EU country counts as a subsequent application regardless of whether the earlier decision was positive or negative.
Applicants challenging the law argued that EU legislation draws a distinction between two situations: cases where a previous asylum claim was rejected and cases where protection was granted.
The Constitutional Court noted that the EU asylum procedure rules list these scenarios separately when determining whether a claim is admissible. Judges also pointed to existing EU case law suggesting the two situations may be treated differently.
Belgium’s government disagrees with that interpretation. Authorities cited a December 2024 ruling from the EU court that they believe supports a broader definition of “subsequent application.”
The Luxembourg-based court will now determine whether Belgium’s interpretation complies with EU law.
Families left without housing
The court’s ruling described the immediate impact on asylum-seekers affected by the policy.
Many applicants were nationals of Afghanistan, Palestine, Eritrea, Cameroon, Turkey, Venezuela, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Several had previously obtained refugee protection in Greece before seeking assistance in Belgium.
According to the ruling, some individuals lost access to Fedasil accommodation, the national reception network for asylum-seekers, after their claims were classified as subsequent applications.
Several people ended up without housing and relied on churches, volunteers, private hosts, or relatives for shelter. In some cases, Belgian labor courts ordered Fedasil to provide accommodation, though the Constitutional Court said that those decisions were not carried out.
Judges stated that denying reception support could place migrants in conditions incompatible with a dignified life, particularly for families with children and other vulnerable people.
(Image courtesy of KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA via Pexels)
Reception system changes suspended
The court also suspended other parts of the July 2025 reforms that removed alternative pathways for asylum-seekers to access social assistance.
Before the law changed, Fedasil could choose not to assign certain applicants to its accommodation network or could lift a placement requirement in special cases.
That flexibility allowed some asylum-seekers to seek support through municipal welfare offices instead.
The reforms abolished those options. The court concluded that the changes could leave applicants without any support beyond medical care.
Judges cited several situations where problems could arise. These included cases where the Fedasil network was already full, applicants staying with legally resident relatives in Belgium, or people whose health or personal circumstances made reception center housing unsuitable.
The ruling mentioned the case of a Turkish mother and her adult daughter whose medical and disability-related needs were not adequately addressed within the reception system.
EU court holds final say
The final decision now rests with the Court of Justice of the EU.
That court will determine whether EU law allows member states to classify applications from people already protected elsewhere as subsequent asylum claims and restrict reception benefits accordingly.
Belgium’s government maintains that the policy is compatible with European rules and expects the upcoming EU migration pact to reinforce its position.
For now, the Constitutional Court’s suspension remains in place while Europe’s highest court for EU law prepares to weigh in.