Belgium - Constitutional Court, judgment no. 198/2009

The absence of any legislative provision granting persons recognised as stateless in Belgium a residence right, comparable to that enjoyed by recognised refugees, is discriminatory.  

Case name (in original language)
Arrêt no. 198/2009
Case status
Decided
Case number
198/2009
Citation
Belgium, Constitutional Court, 17 December 2009, No. 198/2009, available at http://www.const-court.be/public/f/2009/2009-198f.pdf (in French) and http://www.const-court.be/public/n/2009/2009-198n.pdf (in Dutch)
Date of decision
State
Court / UN Treaty Body
Constitutional Court
Language(s) the decision is available in
Dutch
French
Applicant's country of birth
Azerbaijan
Applicant's country of residence
Azerbaijan
Relevant Legislative Provisions

Articles 7.1, 23 and 24 of the 1954 Convention

Articles 10 and 11 of the Belgian Constitution (principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination)

Article 49 of the Law of 15 December 1980 (Aliens Law)

Article 98 of the Royal Decree of 8 October 1981 (Aliens Decree)

Decision & Reasoning

The Constitutional Court held that the difference in treatment in regard to their right of residence between recognised refugees and recognised stateless persons who involuntarily lost their nationality and cannot obtain a legal and durable right of residence in another state, constitutes discrimination since different treatment is applied to persons who find themselves in comparable situations.

The Constitutional Court concluded that a stateless person who has been recognised as such because he has involuntarily lost his nationality, and shows that he cannot obtain a legal and durable right of residence in another state with which he has ties, is discriminated against in the enjoyment of his fundamental rights. This discrimination, stated the Constitutional Court, stems from the absence of any legislative provision granting persons recognised as stateless in Belgium a right of residence comparable to the one enjoyed by refugees.

According to Constitutional Court, it was first and foremost up to the legislator to remedy this situation, as only the legislator can set the conditions under which stateless persons are entitled to acquire a residence permit.

Outcome

The case was referred back to the Labour Court as the judgement of the Constitutional Court was a response to a preliminary question asked by the Labour Court.