From police reform to victim support: the legacy of the Dutroux case

Missing Persons Unit

The Missing Persons Unit, part of the federal police, is called in whenever someone, particularly a child, goes missing. That was not always the case. In 1995, there was little expertise regarding missing persons. That changed with the disappearances involving Julie and Mélissa, and An and Eefje.

The then Justice minister, Stefaan De Clerck, asked the gendarmerie to set up a national missing persons unit. This was established in September 1995, under the leadership of Alain Remue. The unit has investigated tens of thousands of cases, 97% of which it has been able to resolve.

Child Focus

Another organisation that did not exist in 1996 but now seems indispensable when children go missing: Child Focus. The organisation was set up at the request of Jean-Denis Lejeune, the father of the murdered Julie.

He knew that in the US there was a centre that helped to search for missing and abused children. In 1998, Belgium established its own organisation, a collaboration between the federal government and the King Baudouin Foundation.

Child Focus is called in when a minor goes missing in suspicious circumstances. It distributes posters, gathers information via a central telephone number and provides parents with emotional support. The organisation also combats child sexual abuse, including by investigating websites containing images of abuse.

Victims’ rights

Until late in the 20th century, Belgian criminal law paid little attention to the victim. Anyone who fell victim to a crime could claim compensation, but otherwise had little say in how the investigation was conducted.

That changed in the wake of the Dutroux case and the Brabant Killers investigation. The Franchimont Act was introduced in 1998, granting victims more rights and enabling them to request that investigators look into specific matters.

As the parents of the abducted and murdered children had often been left to cope on their own, the police and the judiciary also began to pay greater attention to victim support. Specialised centres were set up, where members of the public can ask questions and where judicial assistants offer practical and emotional support.

Sentence enforcement courts

One of the people who came in for the most criticism was Justice minister Melchior Wathelet. In 1992, he decided Dutroux could be released on parole, after he was convicted in 1989 for abducting and raping girls. The public prosecutor’s office advised against his release, but other bodies gave positive recommendations and Wathelet signed off on his conditional release.

To prevent this happening again, committees for conditional release were established, later succeeded by the sentence enforcement courts: special courts that determine whether someone who has not yet served their full sentence can be released on parole. This is intended to make the system fairer and more transparent.

Federal and local police

For decades, the municipal police, gendarmerie and judicial police had been working alongside – and sometimes against – one another at the public prosecutors’ offices.

When Dutroux was arrested, it emerged that he was no stranger to the gendarmerie. They had even tailed him and searched his home after the disappearance of Julie and Mélissa. However, that led nowhere, and the information had not been shared with investigators. Senior police officials were called on to explain the situation in parliament, where the poor functioning of the system became clear.

Nevertheless, it took another brief escape by Dutroux in 1998 before any decisions were taken. Eight parties from the majority and the opposition – with the exception of the then Vlaams Blok – signed an agreement, merging the gendarmerie, the judicial police and the municipal police into an integrated force with two tiers: local and federal.

This reform is generally viewed positively. Nevertheless, complaints continue to arise regarding the flow of information, as in the run-up to the 2016 terrorist attacks in Brussels in which 36 people were killed.

In the war on drugs at the port of Antwerp, too, there are reports of tension between the local criminal investigation department and the federal police. The federal police lack the personnel and resources to tackle major drug-related crime, while local police are only permitted to deal with small-time street dealers.

Federal public prosecutor’s office

As revealed by the damning hearings of the Dutroux parliamentary inquiry, it was not only within the police where cooperation could have been better. There were also problems within the public prosecutor’s offices. A magistrate in Charleroi who had a suspect appear before him was often unaware that the same person was also wanted in Neufchâteau.

For complex cases spanning several judicial districts, the federal public prosecutor’s office was established in 2002. It deals not only with terrorism but also with bribery in football, sexual abuse within the Church, the hijacking of Belgian ships and other issues.

The High Council of Justice

To be a judge or public prosecutor in the 1980s, you most likely had the right party membership card or knew a politician. It meant that people who were not actually competent could make it to the bench.

One of the promises that prime minister Jean-Luc Dehaene made to the parents of the abducted girls was that political appointments would be brought to an end. The Council was established in 1998: an independent body comprising magistrates and members of the public. It oversees the functioning of the judiciary, organises entrance exams for magistrates and nominates new judges and public prosecutors. These senior magistrates can now only be appointed for two terms, rather than for the rest of their careers.

Media relations

The Dutroux case also brought about changes in the relationship between the judiciary and the press. As politicians realised that the judiciary needed to improve its communication, the Franchimont Act of 1998 stipulated that every public prosecutor’s office must have press spokespeople, to provide accurate information while respecting the confidentiality of the investigation.

At the same time, the Dutroux case was an eye-opener for VRT’s news service, says court reporter Mark Morren, who had been following events since 1996. 

“The VRT had tuned in to the press conference at which Bourlet announced Dutroux’s arrest, but our man on the ground found it a let-down. He’d been hoping for a breakthrough in the murder of [Walloon politician] André Cools, and what did he get? A missing girl in Bertrix,” Morren says.

“We didn’t cover that sort of thing at the VRT; our focus was on Wetstraat, the Middle East and the war in the disintegrating Yugoslavia. We’d paid barely any attention to Laetitia’s disappearance, nor to Sabine’s, Julie’s or Mélissa’s, and not even to An’s and Eefje’s by the seaside. Nor to the appeals from the distraught parents, the search operations or the stalled investigations – it wasn’t the sort of thing the public broadcaster was interested in.”

That, too, has since changed.