Non-reception policy: Arizona crosses yet another line

While the government and the Minister for Asylum and Migration give the impression that the situation is under control, reality tells a different story. Although the waiting list for reception has dropped below 2,000 people, this does not mean that no one is left homeless.

The so-called “Brussels Deal”, through which the federal government and the Brussels Region fund 2,000 places within the homeless support network, does not provide a structural solution for applicants for international protection. These places are not exclusively reserved for them, there is no automatic referral from Fedasil, and according to European case law, the responsibility to provide reception still lies with Fedasil.

Despite repeated calls from civil society, as well as Belgian and international institutions, to address this untenable situation, the government has once again chosen to tighten its policy. New legislative changes have excluded additional groups of applicants for international protection, even as the number of reception places continued to decline.

Non-governmental and humanitarian organisations are trying to compensate for the authorities’ shortcomings, but their emergency networks are overwhelmed and struggling to meet growing demand.

Yet, these are fundamental rights such as:

• access to shelter
• food
• clothing
• medical and psychological care
• legal assistance

The report also highlights that thousands of court rulings require Fedasil to provide reception, yet the government has not adjusted its policy. This undermines not only the protection of human rights, but also respect for the rule of law.

This situation is not a temporary failure, but the result of a deliberate policy. As long as people are forced to sleep on the streets, court decisions remain unenforced, and no structural measures are taken, Belgium will continue to violate its international obligations.

The report nevertheless underlines that solutions do exist:

• guarantee dignified reception
• structurally increase capacity
• ensure sufficient funding
• activate a fair distribution plan

Continuing and further tightening this policy is therefore unacceptable.