Belgium’s ‘pay-to-stay’ drug lord plan draws expert fire

Belgian Justice Minister Annelies Verlinden has introduced a draft law that would allow judges to make convicted drug traffickers and organized crime figures pay for the cost of their own imprisonment, a proposal experts are calling symbolic politics with limited practical impact.

The measure, approved at the final Council of Ministers before the summer parliamentary break, targets individuals convicted of serious organized crime, drug trafficking, and human trafficking — specifically those who have profited significantly from these crimes. According to VRT NWS, the Verlinden cabinet estimates it could generate €5 to €6 million per year, though officials have not disclosed how that figure was calculated.

How the Proposal Would Work

Under the draft law, a judge would decide on a case-by-case basis whether to impose a “detention contribution” (detentiebijdrage), taking into account the offender’s financial capacity, social situation, and prospects for reintegration. The contribution would apply to defendants in major drug trials such as “Costa” and “Kriva Rochem,” two high-profile cocaine trafficking cases that have exposed the scale of drug-related crime flowing through the port of Antwerp.

Imprisonment in Belgium costs approximately €160 per day per inmate. The proposal does not specify what percentage of that cost convicted criminals would be required to pay, nor does it detail how contributions would be collected from those who claim insolvency or have hidden their assets.

Expert Criticism

Criminologist Tom Daems of KU Leuven told VRT NWS that while the proposal targets those who have made large profits from crime, Belgium already has tools to hit criminals financially — including confiscation orders and fines. “The proposal seems to play on symbolism, while it’s unclear what it can yield,” Daems said. “It’s not inconceivable that such systems ultimately cost more in administration, procedures and recovery than they generate.”

The High Council of Justice (HRJ), an independent advisory body, went further, calling the proposal “a stopgap measure that ignores the need to invest in better deprivation of criminal assets and better collection of financial penalties and court costs.” The HRJ argued that if sufficient resources were directed toward investigating money flows, a detention contribution would be unnecessary.

International Context

The concept of making prisoners pay for their stay — often called “pay-to-stay” — exists in various forms internationally. The United States has such systems in most states, and Germany operates a “Haftkostenbeitrag” (detention cost contribution). However, Verlinden’s proposal is unusual in that it specifically targets certain crime types rather than assessing ability to pay regardless of the offense.

The Netherlands considered a similar proposal to charge inmates €16 per day but abandoned it years ago amid concerns that it would deepen inmates’ debt and hinder rehabilitation. In Flanders, when electronic monitoring was introduced in the late 1990s, a small contribution of approximately €2.50 per day was charged but later dropped for the same reason, according to Daems.

Existing Asset Recovery Mechanisms

Belgium already has significant tools for recovering criminal wealth. The Central Office for Seizure and Confiscation (COIV) managed a record €148 million in criminal assets in 2025, according to VRT NWS, though the COIV’s director described this as still “the tip of the iceberg.” The government is also establishing a financial prosecutor’s office and a port prosecutor’s office to better track criminal money flows.

Critics argue that rather than adding new layers of financial obligations, the government should focus on strengthening these existing mechanisms. The HRJ noted that if sufficient resources go into investigating money flows from the start of each criminal investigation, more criminal assets would be confiscated through existing channels.

Broader Reform Package

The detention contribution is part of a broader package of reforms aimed at tackling organized crime, including changes to the challenge procedure (wrakingsprocedure) that the government says will speed up major drug trials. These trials have faced significant delays due to multiple challenge requests against judges. Critics, including Peter Callens, chair of the Order of Flemish Bars, have warned that restricting the challenge procedure could undermine due process and public confidence in the judiciary.

What’s Next

The Council of State must still issue an advisory opinion on the draft law before it returns to the government and ultimately to parliament for approval. As the legislative process unfolds, the central question remains: will the detention contribution generate meaningful revenue and deterrence, or will it become what critics say it is — a symbol that costs more to administer than it returns?