Belgian Defamation Law: Laster, Eerroof and False Accusation (2026)

Belgian defamation law splits reputational harm into more categories than most readers expect, and which one applies can decide real facts, such as whether the truth of what was said is even relevant. This section holds two detailed pages: one on the core distinction between laster/calomnie and eerroof/diffamation, and one on the separate offense of making a false complaint to the authorities.

What follows here is an orientation to how those two pages fit together, to the civil route most defamation disputes actually take today, and to a genuinely Belgian procedural quirk involving the press.

Information last verified on 21 July 2026. This page provides general legal information and does not constitute legal advice in an individual case.

What this section covers

This section holds two pages that are easy to confuse but genuinely different. Defamation in Belgium covers the core distinction between laster/calomnie and eerroof/diffamation, the penalty at article 444, plain insult at article 448, and the civil route most disputes now take. False accusation to the authorities in Belgium covers article 445, a narrower and separate offense aimed specifically at a malicious written complaint to a judicial or other authority, rather than a statement made to the public or to the person concerned. Where a lawfully made recording is used to accuse someone, the making of the recording itself is covered in the Belgian recording laws section.

Laster/calomnie versus eerroof/diffamation

Article 443 of the Strafwetboek/Code pénal defines the wrong as maliciously imputing to a person a specific fact capable of harming their honor or exposing them to public contempt, and splits it in two depending on whether the law allows the accused to prove that fact is true. Where the law admits proof and the imputation is false or unproven, the offense is laster/calomnie. Where the law does not admit proof at all, even if the statement happens to be true, the offense is eerroof/diffamation. Article 444 sets one penalty, imprisonment of 8 days to 1 year plus a fine, for both. The full distinction, including plain insult at article 448 and why the two offenses are easy to mix up, is on the defamation page.

A different wrong: false accusation to the authorities

Reporting someone to the police, a prosecutor, or another authority is a genuinely different act from defaming them in conversation or in print, and article 445 treats it as its own offense, lasterlijke aangifte/dénonciation calomnieuse, punished at 15 days to 6 months plus a fine. It requires a written complaint made with both malice and falsity together, which separates it from the ordinary defamation offenses above. A complaint made in good faith, later shown to be mistaken, is not this offense. The full elements are on the false accusation page.

The civil route: Book 6 of the Civil Code

A great deal of what looks like a defamation dispute in Belgium never becomes a criminal prosecution at all, and is instead fought as a civil claim for damages. The old rule at article 1382 of the Burgerlijk Wetboek/Code civil is now repealed. Book 6 of the Civil Code entered into force on 1 January 2025 and governs non contractual liability going forward, with the general fault rule at article 6.5 and fault itself defined at article 6.6. What matters is the date of the harmful act, not the date the claim is filed: a statement made before 1 January 2025 is still judged under the old article 1382, even where the claim over it is filed well after Book 6 took effect.

Press offenses and the Hof van Assisen

A distinctive procedural feature of Belgian defamation law is that a press offense has historically been sent to the Hof van Assisen, the Cour d’assises in French, the court normally reserved for the most serious crimes, rather than to an ordinary criminal court, under article 150 of the Constitution. The one significant exception is a press offense motivated by racism or xenophobia, which is correctionalized and handled by the ordinary criminal courts instead.

What changes on 1 September 2026

A wholly new Penal Code enters into force on 1 September 2026 and, for defamation, does more than renumber. It merges laster and eerroof, the very distinction explained above, into a single offense called laster, at article 240, placed at niveau 1, the lowest of the new code’s eight penalty levels, which carries no term of imprisonment at all. Article 445 becomes article 242 and article 448 becomes article 244. If you are reading this after that date, the two pages in this section carry the new numbers alongside the current ones.

Where to go from here

For the laster/calomnie versus eerroof/diffamation distinction in full, see Defamation in Belgium. For the separate offense of a malicious false complaint to authority, see False accusation to the authorities in Belgium. For recording a conversation, see the Belgian recording laws section, and for cameras and surveillance, see the Belgian privacy law section. For other topics, return to Belgium Laws.

This page provides general legal information about a foreign legal system and does not constitute legal advice for an individual case. Whether a specific statement is laster/calomnie, eerroof/diffamation, or neither, depends on the exact facts, and the law changes materially on 1 September 2026. Check the current text on ejustice.just.fgov.be, or consult a lawyer, before acting on anything here.