Belgium's new Criminal Code: what has changed since 1 September 2026
Publication · September 2, 2026
On 1 September 2026, Belgium's new Criminal Code entered into force, presented by the Federal Public Service Justice as the first major revision of criminal law in more than a century and a half. The text results from the Acts of 29 February 2024 introducing Books 1 and 2 of the Criminal Code, published in the Belgian Official Gazette of 8 April 2024. Entry into force, initially set for 8 April 2026, was postponed to allow the necessary preparations to be completed. Stemming from work begun as early as 2015, the reform aims for a simpler, more precise and more coherent criminal framework. This note outlines the broad features of the new regime, without substituting for an analysis specific to each situation.
The reform proceeds from a renewed philosophy of punishment. Imprisonment is no longer conceived as the default response: it becomes a measure of last resort, which may be imposed only where the aims assigned to the sentence cannot be achieved by another penalty or measure. In return, the range of sanctions is broadened, so as to offer the court a more graduated palette. This logic, sometimes referred to as that of the ultimum remedium, seeks to reconcile firmness towards the most serious acts with proportionate responses to conduct of lesser intensity. It nonetheless presupposes a strengthened duty to give reasons for decisions, the precise scope of which will have to be clarified through judicial practice.
The most structural change lies in the abandonment of the traditional threefold classification. The former Code distinguished between crimes, misdemeanours and contraventions, a distinction that governed, among other things, the competent court and the rules on limitation. The new Code replaces it with a single scale of eight levels of principal penalties, applicable to all offences. Each offence is now attached to one of these levels, which determines the nature and intensity of the penalty incurred. This reorganisation alters the very grammar of Belgian criminal law and requires reasoning in terms of levels rather than categories. The procedural consequences of this shift must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
The scale runs from level 1, the lowest, to level 8, the highest. Level 1 has a distinctive feature: it carries no custodial sentence, the authorities citing by way of example offences such as defamation or calumny. From the next level upwards, imprisonment again becomes conceivable, but the court must then justify why an alternative penalty would not suffice. The highest levels correspond to the most serious acts, the top of the scale being capable of leading to life imprisonment. The level applicable to a given offence, as well as the penalty actually incurred, must be verified against the text and cannot be presented as automatic.
The reform also introduces new offences. The Federal Public Service Justice cites, among others, ecocide and incitement to suicide, and announces heavier penalties for certain acts, in particular violence against persons holding a social function, intra-family violence and terrorism. Road homicide, often mentioned in the same modernising movement, follows its own legislative path and must be distinguished from the offences included in the new Code from the outset. These developments reflect heightened attention to certain contemporary phenomena. Their precise scope, their constituent elements and the penalties attached to them call for separate examination, which the following articles undertake for road homicide and ecocide.
The entry into force of a new Criminal Code does not upset the principles governing the application of the law over time. Criminal law has no retroactive effect: acts are in principle assessed according to the text in force at the time they were committed. By way of exception, where the new law is more lenient, it applies to earlier acts not yet finally adjudicated. This mechanism, inherited from Article 2 of the former Criminal Code, retains its full relevance during the transitional phase. The date of the acts thus becomes a decisive parameter: it governs the applicable text and, where appropriate, the operation of the more lenient criminal law, which must be assessed provision by provision.
For companies and their directors, the reform warrants a review of compliance arrangements. The redesign of the penalty scale, the new offences and the retention of the criminal liability of legal persons call for a reassessment of the mapping of criminal risks. One should, however, guard against hasty conclusions: the classification of an offence, the applicable penalty level and the possible impact of a more lenient law must be verified against the consolidated text and the facts of each matter. This note is purely informative in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Every particular situation deserves a dedicated analysis, in the light of the official sources and the emerging judicial practice.