BELGIUM Trends and Developments Contributed by: Valerijus Ostrovskis, Coline Cauvin, Yapa Thepkanjana and Delphine Buyle, ACQUIS
Asset-Freeze Derogations and the Question of Intervening Designations The administration of asset-freeze derogations has become a significant area of Belgian practice. In Bel - gium, the General Administration of the Treasury with - in the Federal Public Service Finance is the competent authority for derogations from financial sanctions, and frozen assets cannot be released without its authori - sation. Practitioners have reported that certain licence applications, including applications relating to the payment of legal fees, have experienced significant delays during 2026, affecting business operations. The Court of Justice has now confirmed that the release mechanism in Article 6 (1) of Regulation 269/2014 is capable of covering the return of securi - ties, but the assessment remains one for the national authority on a case-by-case basis. A recurring difficulty arises from the time that elapses between the filing of an application and its determi - nation. A number of applications now reaching deci - sion were submitted in 2022, 2023 or 2024, before the designation of certain Russian entities operating in the financial sector. Where an intermediary in the pay - ment or custody chain has been listed in the mean - time, the authority must assess the application against the designations in force at the date of its decision, since a release must not benefit a designated person. An application that was unobjectionable when filed may therefore require updating, and the analysis must address each designated party that has since entered the chain. Enforcement Developments Belgian enforcement activity in the past year has been most visible in relation to Russia’s shadow fleet. At the end of February 2026, the Ethera , a tanker included on the EU list of vessels associated with the circumven - tion of the oil-related measures, was intercepted in the North Sea by Belgian forces, with French support, and directed to the port of Zeebrugge. The vessel was placed under judicial seizure, a financial security exceeding EUR10 million was imposed as a condi - tion of its release, and the federal prosecutor opened an investigation. The operation illustrates the willing - ness of the Belgian authorities to act against vessels
suspected of forming part of the shadow fleet within Belgium’s maritime zone. The Belgian courts have also handed down a signifi - cant conviction in an export-control case. On 11 June 2026, the 47th chamber of the Brussels criminal court ( tribunal correctionnel de Bruxelles ) convicted three individuals for circumventing the EU restrictive meas - ures and dual-use controls by exporting controlled goods to Russia through intermediary countries. The court found that they had operated as a criminal organisation, and based the conviction in part on the Brussels regional ordinance of 20 June 2013 govern - ing the importation, exportation and transit of military and dual-use goods – a reminder that export-control competence in Belgium is in part a regional matter. The principal defendant received a custodial sentence of five years, partly suspended, together with a fine of EUR80,000, with heavier penalties imposed on a co- defendant tried in absentia. The court classified the conduct as a political offence affecting public security. The judgment, which remains subject to appeal, is notable for the use of the criminal organisation clas - sification and the severity of the penalties. Customs and circumvention enforcement is also active, although less of it reaches the public record. In practice, the authorities of different member states increasingly share information, with the result that a customs investigation opened in one member state can lead to enquiries in others into the same operators or transactions. This can extend to the group level: the activities of a single company across several member states, as well as the activities of affiliated companies or subsidiaries established in other member states, may come within the scope of such enquiries. Opera - tors with cross-border supply chains should assume that an issue identified in one jurisdiction may be pur - sued elsewhere within the Union. Publicly available Belgian case law on sanctions remains limited. There is little reported jurisprudence, in part because criminal decisions are not systemati - cally published, which makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions about prosecutorial practice from the published record alone.
65 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook