Governance and oversight

Institutional organisation, allocation of competences and interaction between public oversight mechanisms: local public order, social inspections, and criminal prosecution in the event of offences.

The central principle is the distinction between:

Lawful practice by adults (ordinary law, social and administrative rules).
Prohibited conduct (minors, coercion, exploitation, trafficking, related offences), which falls under criminal law.

1. Principles 2. Allocation of competences 3. Public authorities 4. Oversight logic 5. Institutional coordination

1. Principles

Governance of sex work in Belgium is multi-level. Authorities do not intervene indiscriminately: they act according to the subject matter (criminal, social, administrative, public order) and the objective pursued (protection, prevention, oversight or prosecution).

Protective objective

Prevent situations of exploitation and coercion.
Ensure conditions compatible with dignity, safety and health.
Enable effective reporting and remedies (without moral judgement).

Clarity and oversight objective

Verify compliance with applicable rules (authorisations, labour law, social security, public order).
Repress serious offences (trafficking, violence, minors, coercion, etc.).
Avoid unnecessary or repetitive checks: proportionate and coordinated oversight.

Practical reference: an inspection may be administrative (authorisations and operating conditions), social (employment contracts, declarations, wellbeing at work), or criminal (offences). Powers and safeguards vary depending on the framework.

2. Allocation of competences

The allocation of competences does not constitute a hierarchy: each level of authority acts within its own remit. In practice, situations may involve several dimensions simultaneously (location and public order, employment status, criminal offences), which makes coordination essential.

Federal level

Criminal law, labour law, social security and the general regulatory framework.

Criminal offences (trafficking, exploitation, minors, violence).
Employment rules (contracts, employer obligations) and social security.

Regions

Related competences that may affect the activity, depending on the subject matter.

Support policies and sector-specific measures.
Related frameworks (e.g. economic policy, urban planning, housing, where relevant).

Municipalities

Public order, local regulations and administrative policing.

Municipal by-laws and operating conditions for premises.
Decisions of the mayor relating to safety and public order.

In practice: a single location may simultaneously be subject to local public-order rules, social obligations (where work is carried out under an employment contract), and, in the event of suspected abuse, judicial intervention.

3. Public authorities

Several authorities may intervene, each strictly within the limits of its legal competences. Their roles are complementary: the objective is to address each aspect through the competent authority, without unnecessary duplication.

Social and labour inspections

Oversight of social rules (contracts, declarations, working conditions, wellbeing at work).

Employment contracts, working hours, wages, declarations.
Working conditions, hygiene and safety.
Social security affiliation and declarations, where applicable.

Police and prosecution services

Criminal offences: exploitation, trafficking, coercion, minors, violence.

Detection and investigation.
Victim protection and prosecution.
Priority given to high-risk situations (minors, coercion).

Local authorities (administrative)

Public order, operating conditions and administrative investigations.

Decisions of the mayor (administrative policing).
Checks relating to the operation of an establishment.
Administrative measures in the event of a serious risk.

Focus: municipal integrity investigations (administrative framework)

For certain establishments or activities, a municipality may initiate an integrity investigation at the initiative of the mayor, in order to assess the risk of links to serious offences (e.g. trafficking, procuring, money laundering, exploitation of minors). Such investigations focus in particular on persons who manage, finance or control the activity.

Procedure (key elements)

Decision to initiate the investigation taken at municipal level.
Administrative examination conducted within a regulated timeframe, with the possibility of extension.
Possible consultation of other competent authorities (police, judicial authorities, social inspections, financial services, etc.).
Where necessary, a specialised advisory opinion may be requested for risk assessment.

Rights and safeguards

Right to be informed of the procedure and to present observations before any adverse decision.
Written, reasoned and notified decision.
Availability of appeal procedures in accordance with applicable rules.
Confidentiality of the procedure: access limited to authorised persons and regulated data retention.

4. Oversight logic

Public oversight pursues distinct objectives depending on the framework: administrative compliance, respect for social rules, or criminal enforcement. Powers, procedures and safeguards vary accordingly.

Administrative oversight

Ensures compliance with a regulatory framework (authorisations, operating conditions, public order).
May result in refusal, suspension or administrative closure in regulated cases.
Must be reasoned and proportionate to the identified risk.

Social oversight

Focuses on the application of labour and social security rules (depending on status).
Centres on obligations: declarations, contracts, working conditions and wellbeing.
May trigger administrative or criminal follow-up in the presence of indicators of serious abuse.

Criminal oversight

Targets the detection and prosecution of offences (trafficking, minors, coercion, violence).
Judicial framework: investigation, evidence gathering, victim protection and prosecution.
Priority given to serious offences and situations of vulnerability.

Key point: the same report may lead to different pathways depending on the facts (e.g. social non-compliance → inspection; risk of exploitation/coercion → police/prosecution; public-order risk → municipality).

5. Institutional coordination

Coordination aims to ensure coherence of public action, avoid unjustified duplicate inspections, and ensure that each situation is handled by the competent authority in light of the nature of the facts.

Why coordinate?

Avoid multiple interventions concerning the same facts.
Preserve confidentiality and limit access to data to what is strictly necessary.
Improve responsiveness in case of danger (rapid referral to the appropriate service).

Institutional good practices (reference points)

Identified contact channels (contact points, reporting procedures).
Regulated information sharing: legal basis, purpose limitation, proportionality.
Traceability of access and limited retention periods.

Balance sought: protect without stigmatising, oversee without excessive intrusion, and ensure avenues of appeal where administrative decisions affect the activity.