On a cool spring evening in Brussels, lawyers, academics, journalists, policy experts, civil society leaders and business representatives gathered at the UCLouvain to discuss and dissect the legal and societal frameworks necessary to strengthen anti-corruption efforts. There was an acknowledgement from the start that corruption is not a distant or abstract issue. That it is shaping public trust, political legitimacy and democratic resilience in Belgium and across Europe.
Hosted by Transparency International Belgium, in partnership with the UCLouvain School of Management, the 2026 Spring Seminar From Reform to Reality: Rethinking Anti-Corruption in Belgium” focused on one central question: now that the European Union has adopted its landmark Anti-Corruption Directive, will Belgium seize the moment to drive meaningful reform, and how does this go beyond the minimum levels of compliance?
It was an occasion to hear from multiple perspectives. Investigative journalists sat alongside corporate sustainability leaders. Legal scholars exchanged perspectives with anti-mafia advocates. Policymakers and civil society representatives debated not only how corruption should be punished, but how it can be prevented before it takes root.
Corruption Is Not "Somewhere Else"
In her opening remarks, Gudrun Vande Walle, Executive Director of TI Belgium, reminded participants that corruption is fundamentally “the abuse of legitimate power for private gain.” It does not only appear in dramatic bribery scandals. It can also emerge quietly through opaque lobbying, lobbying for private gain, and the misappropriation of assets.
Vande Walle presented sobering statistics. The Global Corruption Barometer-EU results show that 62% of respondents believe government corruption is a serious problem. Belgium’s own standing in the Corruption Perceptions Index has steadily declined — from a score of 77 in 2016 to 69 in recent years.
Those numbers signal a gradual erosion of public confidence. When citizens begin to believe that access, privilege, or influence matter more than fairness or accountability, democratic institutions weaken.
A Turning Point for Europe
At the centre of the discussion was the EU Anti-Corruption Directive 2026/1021, signed on 29 April 2026. The directive is the first comprehensive EU-wide effort to harmonise anti-corruption standards across Member States.
The directive introduces common standards for criminalising corruption-related offences such as bribery, trading in influence, misappropriation of assets, and obstruction of justice. It also strengthens whistleblower protections, reinforces investigative tools, and establishes minimum penalties for both individuals and companies involved in corrupt practices.
Belgium now has two years to transpose the directive into national law and until 2029 to establish a more comprehensive national anti-corruption strategy. The challenge will be to build systems, institutions and cultures that make corruption harder to sustain.
From Criminal Enforcement to Prevention
The first panel of the evening explored anti-corruption through the lens of criminal law and enforcement. Moderated by Stijn De Meulenaer, the discussion brought together Prof. Vanessa Franssen of the University of Liège, Marcella Militello of Basta!, and investigative journalist Louis Colart of “Le Soir”, co-author of reporting on Qatargate. The legal distinctions of existing pathways towards redress and restitution were highlighted and the public confidence trade-offs within these, when less transparency is embraced by companies and organisations for accepting a penalty. The question of social justice underlined the very essence of the impact of current enforcement pathways.
The evening’s second panel shifted the discussion in an equally important direction, prevention. Moderated by Prof. Corentin Hericher of UCLouvain, the panel examined how Belgium can move beyond reactive enforcement toward a proactive culture of integrity. Participants included Raphaël Kergueno of Transparency International EU, Vincent Van Bueren of Gimv, and Eddy Boutmans of the Federal Deontological Commission. Their discussions highlighted that corruption prevention is not only the responsibility of prosecutors or courts. The discussions also acknowledged a difficult reality: corruption often flourishes in environments where oversight is weak, accountability fragmented, and silence rewarded.
A Springboard, Not a Ceiling
In his closing remarks, Marc Beyens, Chair of Transparency International Belgium, captured the consensus of the evening by describing the directive as “an opportunity to use the transposition of the directive for transformation into a better framework for us here in Belgium”
It is a call to help shape the outcomes.
What happens next will depend not only on legislators, but also on journalists, businesses, universities, civil society organisations and citizens themselves. It is a moment in which Belgium considers its role in transposing the directive nationally, and it will need to build on its current frameworks, in consultation with civil society and independent experts. TIB will follow this process and stand ready to advocate for stronger, more transparent systems that restore and maintain citizens’ confidence and towards a society that leads with integrity.
As participants moved from the seminar hall into the networking reception, conversations continued late into the evening. That may have been the clearest sign that the discussion is far from over.
Will you join us in this developing conversation with national implications?
