Belgium Moves to Ban Cyberbullies from Social Media
Belgium’s Digital Affairs Minister Vanessa Matz has announced plans to introduce a system that would allow judges to temporarily ban cyberbullies and other online offenders from social media platforms. The proposal, inspired by a recently applied French law, aims to end what Matz describes as the “sense of impunity online” while raising significant questions about feasibility and enforcement.
The Proposal
Speaking to La DH/Les Sports+, Matz (Les Engagés) said the measure would function as a supplementary criminal penalty for offences committed online, including cyberbullying, sharing intimate images without consent, hate speech, violent threats, and terrorist propaganda. She compared the mechanism to a temporary driving licence withdrawal.
“It’s like the withdrawal of a driving licence: when a motorist commits a serious offence, for example by driving under the influence of alcohol or at excessive speed, the judge can add a temporary withdrawal of the licence to the sentence,” Matz explained, as reported by RTBF. “In the same way, when a person uses social media to commit a serious offence, they could temporarily be banned from it.”
Matz has requested advice from the Belgian Institute for Postal Services and Telecommunications (BIPT) on the concrete implementation of the system, including identification and enforcement methods, while respecting fundamental rights and privacy. A draft law is currently being prepared, and Matz hopes to debate it in parliament in September.
The French Precedent
The proposal draws direct inspiration from France’s SREN law (Sécuriser et réguler l’espace numérique), promulgated in 2024, which introduced the “digital ban” as a supplementary penalty. The first application of this measure occurred on 5 August 2026, when French streamers Naruto (Owen Cenazandotti) and Safine (Safine Hamadi) were sentenced to suspended prison terms and six months of digital banishment from platforms including Twitch and Kick, for online violence and humiliation that preceded the death of Jean Pormanove in 2025.
According to The Brussels Times, the proposal is part of a broader legislative effort to tackle malicious anonymity online. Pseudonymity would remain possible, but courts could lift anonymity protection in cases involving criminal offences. This builds on earlier legislation approved in June 2026 that allows victims of cyberbullying to request the identity of anonymous perpetrators from the Telecommunications Ombudsman’s Office.
Expert Concerns
Professor Heidi Vandebosch of the University of Antwerp, a specialist in cyberbullying research, has raised significant questions about the plan’s practicality. “Social media platforms already have difficulty effectively excluding young people,” she told VRT NWS. “The question is therefore to what extent those rules or penalties are enforceable against perpetrators. Is such a plan practically feasible and controllable?”
Vandebosch also noted that a ban on one platform would not prevent offenders from moving to another. “In research on online hate speech, where large profiles or influencers receive a temporary ban on a platform, we see that they continue on another platform,” she said. “There are so many means of communication to harass a victim in another way.”
She further suggested that the proposal may be primarily symbolic, reflecting a broader political trend toward stricter regulation of social media platforms. “It’s a signal that fits somewhat with the current zeitgeist,” Vandebosch said. “Politicians want to take tougher action against social media platforms.”
Broader Context
The proposal comes amid growing international scrutiny of social media regulation. Australia became the first country to ban social media for young people under 16 in December 2025, though early results have been mixed, with reports indicating that many Australian youth still access platforms through workarounds. As La Libre noted, the measure has drawn comparisons to an “announcement effect” - a political signal rather than a fully developed enforcement mechanism.
What’s Next
Matz hopes to bring the draft legislation to parliament for debate in September. Key questions remain unresolved, including how the ban would be technically enforced across platforms, what duration would be appropriate, and how fundamental rights to freedom of expression would be balanced. As Vandebosch emphasised, “identifying perpetrators is one thing, but there also needs to be a pathway to address this behaviour.” The coming months will reveal whether Belgium can translate this ambitious proposal into a workable legal framework.