Ghent Appeal Court Finds Defendant Guilty in Transfer Case

A defendant who walked free after Belgian authorities failed to transfer him from prison to court on five separate occasions has been found guilty on appeal, the Ghent Court of Appeal ruled on Tuesday. However, due to excessive delays in the proceedings, the court imposed a “simple declaration of guilt” — meaning the man is convicted but receives no punishment.

The case, reported by VRT NWS, highlights a deepening crisis in Belgium’s prison transfer system, where chronic capacity shortages and administrative failures are preventing detainees from appearing before judges.

The Case

The defendant, identified in court documents as “B.S.,” is an undocumented immigrant residing illegally in Belgium. He was arrested on July 14, 2025, and charged with theft of a bicycle, a wallet, and a mobile phone in the Ghent station area. He was placed in pre-trial detention at Haren Prison, a facility near Brussels that has faced persistent overcrowding and staffing problems.

His first scheduled court appearance was on August 21, 2025. But due to what the court described as a “capacity problem,” the defendant could not be transferred from Haren Prison to the courthouse in Ghent. The same scenario repeated itself on four more occasions: August 28, September 5, October 2, and November 6, 2025.

First Instance Ruling

On December 4, 2025, the Ghent court declared the case inadmissible. In its ruling, the court described the transfer problem as a “structural problem” and noted that “no improvement whatsoever is in sight in the short term,” as VRT NWS reported at the time.

The court also found that the defendant’s right to a fair trial had been violated, “not least given the relationship to the relatively limited seriousness of the alleged offenses.” The prosecution had sought a 10-month prison sentence and a €25 fine.

Appeal Ruling

The prosecution appealed the decision. On Tuesday, the Ghent Court of Appeal overturned the lower court’s ruling, finding the case admissible. However, the appeal court agreed that the proceedings had taken too long.

“The periods of inactivity cannot be justified in any way, especially since this concerns a simple case,” the court stated, according to HLN. “The investigation and handling of the case has suffered excessive delay, as a result of which the reasonable time limit has been exceeded.”

Because the reasonable time limit under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights was exceeded, the court imposed a “eenvoudige schuldigverklaring” (simple declaration of guilt). The defendant is found guilty but receives no punishment.

The defendant, who is currently serving a prison sentence in Austria for other offenses, did not attend the appeal hearing.

Systemic Problem

This case is not an isolated incident. In November 2025, a human smuggling suspect was acquitted in Bruges after failing to be transferred from Haren Prison three times. The prosecution appealed that decision as well. VRT NWS reported that the defendant, who risked 8 years in prison, was freed because his right to be present at his own trial had been violated. The West Flanders prosecution appealed the ruling days later, and that appeal remains pending.

In the current case, the prosecution suggested that some transfer failures may stem from administrative errors rather than capacity issues alone. According to HLN, the request for transfer in a related case was submitted only one day before the hearing, whereas regulations require at least three days’ notice.

Analysis

The Ghent Court of Appeal’s ruling represents a middle ground between complete acquittal and a full conviction with punishment. By finding the defendant guilty but imposing no penalty, the court affirmed the validity of the prosecution while acknowledging that systemic failures violated the defendant’s rights.

Legal experts note that this approach avoids setting a precedent that systemic failures automatically invalidate all prosecutions, while still holding the justice system accountable for its shortcomings.

What’s Next

The case raises pressing questions about Belgium’s prison transfer system. With multiple incidents involving Haren Prison and courts in both Ghent and Bruges, the problem appears structural rather than isolated. The Belgian government has yet to announce concrete measures to address the capacity and staffing issues that have left defendants unable to exercise their right to appear before a judge.

The appeal in the related Bruges human smuggling case is still pending, and its outcome will be closely watched as an indicator of how higher courts continue to handle the transfer crisis.