Language Research

The state guarantees the protection of human rights and freedoms in accordance with the principles and norms of international law.

Updated (February 2007)

The Kingdom of Belgium is constitutionally defined as a federal state made up of regions and communities and is divided into linguistic areas.

Concerning language usage, there are three official languages (Dutch, French and German), though "the use of languages current in Belgium is optional; only the law can rule on this matter and only for acts by public authorities and in legal matters", Article 30 of the Constitution states.

In terms of politics and administration, the country is composed of:

1. A Federal State level;

2. Three separate Regions: Flanders, Wallonia and the Brussels-Capital Region;

3. Three distinct Communities: the Dutch-speaking community (often called Flemings) in Flanders and Brussels (about 58% of the Belgian population), the Francophone community in Wallonia and Brussels (about 41% of the population) and the small German-speaking community in the far east of Wallonia (about 0.5% of the population);

4. Four legally bounded Linguistic Areas: Dutch-speaking Flanders, French-speaking Wallonia, bilingual Brussels (Dutch and French) and the small German-speaking corner of Wallonia.

Each community and region has its own directly elected council and local government, through which laws (decrees) over a specific range of matters are approved and may be implemented.

Besides the country's division into distinct linguistic areas, a number of boroughs on either side of the language boundary and in the Flemish fringe area around Brussels have been given a special language status. These so-called language facilities are granted to the inhabitants of those boroughs whose mother tongue differs from the official language of the area: they are allowed to communicate with authorities in their own language and are entitled to receive official documents in it on demand. These measures were originally meant to give language minorities the chance to adapt and learn the official language of the area. Their application, however, has often given rise to political tensions between the Dutch-speaking and French-speaking communities, as the language facilities do not always comply with the territorial division of the state. (For further information, see also Language Research/Language Issues: "Brussels (Halle-Vilvoorde) Problem Paralyzing Belgian Politics", April 2005)

From the historical point of view, the Flemings have felt themselves deemed a minority for years, and the collective memory of this marginalization conveys a feeling that they are "not quite at home" in Belgium, in spite of their slight demographic majority. The historical dominance of French, the sizeable French majority in the capital of Brussels, and the relatively small demographic advantage of Flemings all contribute to an atmosphere in which the French and the Flemings do not behave according to a clear minority/majority relationship.

Generally, Flemings in a number of Walloon boroughs with special language facilities have adapted to the French-language character of their town more easily than have the French-speaking inhabitants in Flanders (officially a Dutch-speaking area), where the facilities continue to be a source of permanent conflict, especially in the Brussels periphery. Although the Flemish government regards the facilities as a measure to help the integration of French-speaking inhabitants into Flanders, many French speakers see the language facilities as their permanent right, and even as a step towards appending the facility boroughs around Brussels to the bilingual capital conglomerate.

These language and community tensions form a permanent backdrop to all events in Belgian politics, but are seldom commented on by the foreign media.

Belgium is often criticized by the representatives of the Council of Europe for not ratifying the Framework Convention on National Minorities. In view of the fact that the intent in the creation of "special language facilities" was to allow time for minority language users to adapt to the official language of the area, it could be argued that the criticism is premature. However, the continuing conflicts imply that the system is not working as well as was hoped, and that the grant of special language facilities is not a successful solution for integration.

Top of page