The European Committee on Social Rights has ruled in a major case concerning Belgian municipalities restricting or prohibiting begging. It found Belgium in violation of the European Social Charter. This sends a clear message against the punishment and stigmatisation of people living in poverty and of begging as a means of subsistence. The case also saw ENNHRI give its first-ever third-party observations before the Committee. The final decision cited these multiple times.

An important finding on begging and poverty

In its decision published on 17 August 2026, the European Committee on Social Rights (the Committee) found Belgium in violation of the European Social Charter (the Charter) over municipal regulations restricting or prohibiting begging.

In response to the complaint initiated by the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and International Movement ADT Fourth World against Belgium (Complaint No. 233/2023), the Committee found:

• Violation of Article 30: municipal regulations prohibiting begging or imposing administrative sanctions on it constitute a restriction on the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion;
• Violation of Article 30 (access to justice dimension): the regulations are not accompanied by effective legal remedies enabling affected persons to challenge them;
• Violation of Article E, read together with Article 30: the municipal regulations at stake have a disproportionate impact on already disadvantaged persons, including Roma communities, amounting to indirect discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin and socio-economic status.

Why the decision matters

The Committee’s decision sends a strong message against the punishment and stigmatisation of people living in poverty and of begging as a means of subsistence. It makes clear that restricting begging can worsen the already precarious situation of people who beg and further stigmatise them. It thus clarifies how public authorities may regulate begging, highlighting that any begging regulations must be grounded within the human rights framework.

It also recalled States Parties’ positive obligation under Article 30 to adopt an overall and coordinated approach to removing obstacles to social rights, including housing and employment. Alongside this, the Committee underlined that authorities must take into account individuals’ concrete circumstances for the right to a legal remedy to be effective. People who beg often face multiple forms of disadvantage, which makes their ability to challenge restrictions severely constrained.

The considerations the decision sets out make it an important precedent for public authorities in Belgium and elsewhere in Europe.

A step forward for ENNHRI and towards future protection

This case saw ENNHRI intervene before the European Committee of Social Rights for the first time, doing so via third-party observations. The Committee’s final decision cited these multiple times.

At the same time, the decision left room to further clarify the protection of begging under the Charter. ENNHRI had invited the Committee to clarify that begging, where it is necessary to live or attempt to live with human dignity, should enjoy protection under the Charter. It stopped short of recognising this explicitly. Instead, approaching the issue through the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion, the Committee focused on whether begging restrictions are compatible with the Charter and proportionate.

Nevertheless, the decision paves the way for further developments in this area. It also shows the value of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) engaging collectively at European level and highlights their important work in advancing social rights and strengthening related European standards.

Full information on the case and ENNHRI’s related work

Read the Committee’s final decision.

See full details on ENNHRI’s third-party observations in the case.

Learn more about ENNHRI’s work on economic and social rights.