Defamation in Belgium: Laster, Eerroof and the Merger Coming in 2026

Belgian defamation law draws a distinction that trips up almost everyone who has not studied it: laster, calomnie in French, and eerroof, diffamation in French, are not the same offense, and which one applies can decide whether the truth of what was said is even relevant.

Both sit in the same old chapter of the Strafwetboek/Code pénal, articles 443 to 452, alongside the false written accusation covered in more detail on a separate page and the more general offense of insult. Most defamation disputes in Belgium today are actually fought out as civil claims for damages rather than as criminal prosecutions, and that civil track changed meaningfully at the start of 2025. A further, larger change arrives on 1 September 2026, when a wholly new Penal Code merges the two criminal offenses this page explains into one.

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

Laster/calomnie versus eerroof/diffamation: the distinction article 443 draws

Article 443 of the Strafwetboek/Code pénal defines the wrong as maliciously imputing to a person a specific fact that is capable of harming their honor or exposing them to public contempt. What the article then splits in two is whether the law allows the accused to prove that fact is true.

Where the law does admit proof of the imputed fact, and the imputation turns out to be false or is not proven, the offense is called laster in Dutch, calomnie in French. Where the law does not admit proof of the imputed fact at all, even if it happens to be true, the offense is called eerroof in Dutch, diffamation in French, and the truth of what was said is simply not a defense.

This is the distinction that catches people out. In ordinary conversation, calomnie sounds like the more serious wrong and diffamation the lesser one, but the legal difference is really about whether truth can even be argued, not about which imputation is worse.

The penalty and what publicity means: article 444

Article 444 sets a single penalty for both laster/calomnie and eerroof/diffamation: imprisonment of 8 days to 1 year, together with a fine. As with every fine printed in the Strafwetboek/Code pénal, the article figure is not the amount a court actually imposes; the opdecimes multiplies it, currently by a factor of ten since 1 February 2026.

Publicity is part of what turns an imputation into this offense. Saying something damaging to the person alone, in private, is a different matter from saying it where it can spread, whether that is in front of witnesses, in a publication, or online. The old chapter, running from article 443 through article 452, also contains the procedural detail and the specific defenses that can apply, alongside two related offenses covered elsewhere on this page and on a companion page: a malicious false complaint to the authorities, and plain insult.

Insult without an imputed fact: article 448

Article 448 punishes belediging, injure in French: an insult that does not impute any specific fact at all. This is different again from both laster/calomnie and eerroof/diffamation, which both require imputing a fact capable of harming someone's honor. An insult with no factual content behind it, purely abusive language, sits under article 448 with its own, lighter penalty of 8 days to 2 months plus a fine.

The malicious false complaint: a separate offense

A malicious false written complaint to the authorities is its own offense, lasterlijke aangifte in Dutch, dénonciation calomnieuse in French, punished at article 445 with imprisonment of 15 days to 6 months plus a fine. Because it is different enough from ordinary laster/calomnie and eerroof/diffamation to deserve its own explanation, including how it differs and what it actually requires, it has its own page: see our page on false accusation to the authorities in Belgium.

Most defamation claims today are civil, and the civil rule changed in 2025

A great deal of what looks like a defamation dispute in Belgium never becomes a criminal prosecution at all. It is fought as a civil claim for damages, historically grounded in the general fault based liability rule that used to sit at article 1382 of the old Burgerlijk Wetboek/Code civil.

Article 1382 is now repealed. Book 6 of the Civil Code, introduced by the law of 7 February 2024 and published in the Belgisch Staatsblad/Moniteur belge on 1 July 2024, entered into force on 1 January 2025 and now governs non contractual liability, including defamation pursued civilly. The general fault rule sits at article 6.5, and fault itself is defined at article 6.6.

What matters is the date of the harmful act, not the date the claim is filed. A defamatory statement made on or after 1 January 2025 falls under the new article 6.5 and 6.6 framework. A statement made before that date is still judged under the old article 1382, even if the civil claim over it is filed well after Book 6 took effect. Treating a present day civil defamation claim as governed by article 1382 alone, without asking when the statement was actually made, risks applying the wrong law entirely.

A Belgian quirk: the press offense and the Hof van Assisen/Cour d'assises

One genuinely distinctive feature of Belgian defamation law is procedural. A press offense, a drukpersmisdrijf in Dutch or délit de presse in French, one committed through the press, 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.

There is one significant exception: a press offense motivated by racism or xenophobia is correctionalized, meaning it is instead handled by the ordinary correctional courts rather than sent to the Assisen/assises. This quirk has shaped how press related defamation cases actually get prosecuted in Belgium, since sending an ordinary case to the court reserved for the gravest crimes is itself a significant practical barrier.

What changes on 1 September 2026

A wholly new Penal Code, published on 8 April 2024 and now due to enter into force on 1 September 2026 after a postponement from an original date in April 2026, restructures Belgian criminal law around eight penalty levels, called niveaus, in place of the old three way split between misdaad, wanbedrijf and overtreding.

For defamation, the change is not just a renumbering. The new code merges laster and eerroof, the very distinction this page has just explained, into a single offense called laster, at article 240. The truth based distinction between the two current offenses disappears with that merger. Article 445, the malicious false complaint, becomes article 242, and article 448, plain insult, becomes article 244.

The new offense at article 240 sits at niveau 1, the lowest of the eight penalty levels, which under the new code carries no term of imprisonment at all, only penalties such as a fine, a work sentence, probation, forfeiture, or a conviction with a declaration of guilt. If you are reading this after 1 September 2026, look for these new article numbers rather than 443, 444 and 448.

This page describes Belgium's general defamation law, both criminal and civil, and does not amount to legal advice for an individual situation. 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.