BELGIUM Law and Practice Contributed by: Valerijus Ostrovskis, Coline Cauvin, Delphine Buyle and Yapa Thepkanjana, ACQUIS
The Law of 2 May 2019 introduced the possibility of administrative penalties, enabling the competent authority to impose fines of between EUR250 and EUR2.5 million outside criminal proceedings. As of 1 September 2026, following the transposition of Directive (EU) 2024/1226, natural persons risk impris - onment of more than three and up to five years. Courts may also impose a criminal fine of EUR200 to EUR2 million, which can be increased to match the actual value of the funds or economic resources involved. Legal persons face criminal fines of EUR15,000 to EUR150 million. Administrative penalties may reach EUR5 million for natural persons and EUR25 million for legal persons. The reforms are expected to enter into force on 1 September 2026, together with the entry into force of the new Belgian Criminal Code. From that date, the criminal fines mentioned above will also be subject to the new statutory surcharge of 2.5 additional decimes, equivalent to a multiplication factor of 1.25. Beyond rules on penalties, the reform introduces aggravating and mitigating circumstances in crimi - nal proceedings, while also comprehensively revising the powers, co-operation mechanisms, and informa - tion-sharing arrangements governing the competent authorities. 2.2.3 Civil Enforcement Action Civil courts do not enforce EU sanctions but do acknowledge EU sanctions in civil or commercial- related disputes, and recognise enforcement actions from Belgium and other EU member states. 2.2.4 Criminal Enforcement Action Under the Law of 13 May 2003 as amended in 2019, officials of the Treasury within FPS Finance have an express statutory mandate to identify and record infringements covered by Article 6 of that Law. This power applies without prejudice to the enforcement powers of judicial police officers and officials of the General Administration of Customs and Excise. Public information on Belgian sanctions enforcement remains limited and fragmented. There is no compre - hensive sanctions-specific enforcement database,
and available information is generally found in FPS Finance guidance, prosecutorial communications and case-specific press reporting. Nevertheless, in the past year, a number of enforcement matters have been made public. • The Federal Prosecutor brought proceedings on 23 February 2026 before the Brussels Criminal Court against three Belgian citizens of Russian origin in connection with an alleged sanctions-evasion scheme operated using Belgian companies. Among other things, the prosecution concerns alleged participation in a criminal organisation and suspected breaches of the Brussels rules on transfers of defence-related products, military-use material, law-enforcement equipment and firearms. The underlying conduct is said to involve exports to Russia of items potentially covered by Regula - tion 833/2014 and the EU Dual-Use Regulation. • Another recent example concerns enforcement against Russia’s shadow fleet. In March 2026, the Belgian Federal Prosecutor announced a criminal investigation concerning a tanker, the Ethera , inter- cepted by the Belgian armed forces in Belgium’s exclusive economic zone. The vessel was sus - pected of sailing under a false flag and of forming part of Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, which is associated with attempts to circumvent EU sanc - tions. The tanker was ordered into Belgian territo - rial waters and seized in the port of Zeebrugge. 2.2.5 Mitigation The prosecution of sanctions violations in Belgium is subject to administrative procedures or judicial crimi - nal procedures. There is currently no explicit national law framework for aggravating or mitigating circum - stances for criminal liability of sanctions violations, other than the applicable EU regulatory framework. Unlike the USA (and especially unlike the Office of Foreign Assets Controls), the EU does not have a clear framework for mitigating (nor aggravating) factors. It is up to each EU member state’s prosecution authority to decide whether one’s actions are sufficient to avoid or lessen the penalty. The Commission provides general and situation-specific guidance for EU operators (eg, importance of internal compliance programmes, as well as performing adequate due diligence in respect
54 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook