Belgium Fails to Protect Girl Despite Gynecologist’s Abuse Report
A four-year-old girl in Belgium who spontaneously and precisely revealed sexual abuse by her father was not immediately protected, despite a gynecologist filing a formal medical report that corroborated the child’s statements with clinical findings. The case, documented in a 46-page alert report submitted to Justice Minister Annelies Verlinden, exposes what advocates describe as systemic failures in Belgium’s child protection system.
A Case of Failed Protection
According to an investigation by La Libre Belgique, the young girl made spontaneous and precise revelations of abuse. A gynecologist conducted clinical examinations that confirmed the child’s statements and filed a formal report (signalement), recommending a criminal complaint to ensure immediate protection. Despite this medical evidence, authorities did not take protective measures.
The case was brought to light by the Collectif des Parents Protecteurs (CPPB), a collective of approximately 84 members including protective parents, lawyers, associations, and professionals. The CPPB submitted its “rapport d’alerte” to Justice Minister Annelies Verlinden (CD&V) on June 1, 2026, as reported by Belga.
Systemic Failures Identified
The CPPB report documents a recurring pattern of institutional failures in how Belgian authorities handle incest cases. The child’s testimony was quickly doubted, the reporting parent (the mother) became the target of suspicion, and the child continued to have contact with the alleged abuser despite persistent concerns.
In a particularly troubling detail, the child’s mother was convicted criminally for non-representation of the child before the abuse allegations against the father were even adjudicated. One court concluded the child’s statements were plausible and suspended direct contact with the father, while another jurisdiction reached the opposite conclusion — highlighting a lack of coordination within the judicial system.
The report notes that the child’s video-recorded hearing did not follow the Tam protocol standards used by specialized police units (Eva cells). Furthermore, the public prosecutor’s office raised the hypothesis of parental alienation without objective evidence, which the report says durably influenced the case assessment.
A National Blind Spot
The CPPB report criticizes Belgium for treating incest cases as isolated individual situations rather than structural issues requiring national reflection. As The Brussels Times reported, the collective is urging Belgian authorities to follow other European countries that have implemented major reforms.
“The analysis highlights a worrying discrepancy between the protective obligations affirmed in legal texts and the reality experienced by certain families,” the report states. “Belgium does not lack tools or protective will, but probably lacks the capacity to transform available knowledge into effective protections.”
One in ten children is estimated to be a victim of incest in Belgium, based on international scientific literature — equivalent to an average of two students per classroom. Yet Belgium maintains no official statistics on incest, which advocates describe as “crimes without a corpse.”
International Context
Countries like Spain and France have undertaken major reforms to better protect children from intrafamilial sexual violence. France has established a parliamentary commission of inquiry into the judicial treatment of incestuous sexual violence against children, ongoing in 2026. Belgium, by contrast, has not engaged in a comprehensive national strategy.
“Belgium, for its part, continues to treat these difficulties as a succession of individual situations or occasional dysfunctions, rather than as structural issues requiring a national reflection on the effective protection of children,” the report concludes.
What’s Next
The CPPB has submitted its findings to Justice Minister Annelies Verlinden, but no official response has been announced. The case raises urgent questions: Will Belgium follow France and Spain in undertaking systemic reforms? How will the contradictory judicial decisions in this case be resolved? And most critically, what has become of the four-year-old girl at the center of the case?
For now, the report stands as a stark indictment of a system that advocates say fails the most vulnerable — children who disclose abuse and find themselves disbelieved, while the protective parents who speak for them become the targets of suspicion.