The King and the New Government

Yesterday, in the presence of the King at Laeken Palace the new government was sworn in. So it is finally over. The bad jokes can stop, politicians wives can stop withholding sex from their husbands, patriotic men can shave their beards off and everyone be glad that the country will not be falling apart right now, at least not because of the deadlock of the parties. One thing that prompted an agreement to finally be made was the inability of the caretaker government to deal with the worsening economic crisis, not just across the European Union but Belgium itself also when agencies downgraded Belgian credit rating from AA+ to AA, which will make borrowing money more expensive (not that I understand economics at all). So, after all this time, even the parties began to realize that if Belgium did not have some kind of government, if even it was not ideal, the two halves of the country would be ruined together. So, finally an agreement was made and the King asked Elio Di Rupo to take the position of Prime Minister. It is one of the smallest governments Belgium ever had with only 13 ministers and 6 secretaries of state. In this case, at this time, maybe smaller is better anyway.

Not everyone of course is happy. That is not going to be surprising but what might be is just what some people are complaining about. One headline said of the new cabinet, “Too few women and too West Flemish”. Is this for a joke? Over five hundred days of deadlock and no government and some people are complaining because only 6 of the 19 are women and 6 of the Flemings are all from West Flanders. Too little diversity? But surely having Elio Di Rupo for Prime Minister should count for a number of different minorities. Limburg has no representative, Antwerp only 3 (hey!) and, for the first Francophone prime minister in decades there is worry for the ability of Elio Di Rupo to speak Dutch (he does not do it very well). The feminists are upset, many Flemings are upset (which should have been expected under the circumstances, by both groups) and one feminist Fleming said there is “no excuse” for this outrage! My apologies for not having all groups represented ideally but really, it was 541 days without any government at all! Obviously not everyone will have everything they want and when this much time has passed by and the situation becomes more and more serious the choices will clearly be worse and worse. This mentality itself is for me what is upsetting. It is no wonder the country seems always on the brink of collapse when everyone is keeping a chart to see if “their” side, group, language, gender, region and everything else is always represented no less than every other one with their own charts.

With everyone talking about the deal that was made, who gets this or that and how many “firsts” this represents for Elio Di Rupo being Prime Minister, the one person the media overlooks in all this is the most important, THE KING! It was all along the King who was the only person involved in the process with no ulterior motives or agenda, no special interest for anything before the nation entire and there was no one like the King who put everything else aside to find an agreement that would be in the best interests of the country. In 2007, 2010 and this year the King had to call off his vacation time because of the crisis and we know how many times he has had to pick new mediators, persuade mediators to stay on and acted himself as a broker between the leading politicians. Before anyone applauds too highly Monsieur Di Rupo, remember the times he was wanting to give up on the process but the King recalled him and persuaded him to stay on and see things through until an agreement was at last reached. While foreign politicians mock Belgium for this impasse and while the media makes a big joke of the inability of the parties to work together it has all the time been the King who has done his duty, ignoring all else, refusing to participate in any festivities so long as the work of the state was left undone because of the deadlock.

Think back to how many mediators resigned over these difficulties. Can I remember them all? Not at all, Bart De Wever, as a courtesy, made the first effort but no one was having anything to do with him. Elio Di Rupo then came in, tried and failed. Danny Pieters and Andre Flahaut took their turn, I remember Johan Vande Lanotte who quit after three months of negotiations (who tried to resign earlier but the King refused him). He was followed by Didier Reynders (who I cannot help find funny, something about him makes me always laugh) then there was Wouter Beke of the Christian Democratic and Flemish Party, also ending in frustration and finally Elio Di Rupo again who has finally emerged as the Prime Minister. Throughout all of these people who tried, grew frustrated and failed in these hundreds of days, the one permanent, reliable and sincere figure who never gave up and who always had only the best interests of his country at heart was King Albert II. He should be given credit for all of his efforts, he is the real hero in this ugly display of partisanship and it is the King who everyone should applaud and be proud of. Vive le Roi! Leve de Koning!

Constitution of Belgium

The Belgian Constitution. It is a complicated subject. The Constitution in effect today actually is not much the same as the original version of 1831 other than the basic framework that Belgium is a popular monarchy and parliamentary democracy. From 1831 to 1970 the Kingdom of Belgium was a “unitary state” with one government for all people, elected by all the people. However, in 1970 the Belgian Constitution began going through many changes to make the kingdom essentially a federal state. This is not uncommon in the world but it is rather uncommon for a country as small as Belgium. Germany, Canada, the United States, for example, are all federal states. However, in Belgium, rather than states, there are “regions” and “communities” which are based on local differences, not importance. In other words, being a region or a community does not give any privilege over the other, both exist on the same level in terms of government organization.

Article 1 lays out the basic form of government. Article 2 distinguishes the three communities (Flemish, French and German) and Article 3 distinguishes the three regions (Flanders, Wallonie and the Brussels capital region). Article 4 determines what languages are exclusive to these parts of the country (Dutch for Flanders, French for Wallonie, both languages for Brussels and German for the German community). Each of these have their own political establishment and the linguistic borders can only be changed by majorities in the Chamber of Deputies for each region. The regions are then divided into provinces for the management of local issues. This is all part of Title I. Title II deals with the civil rights of all Belgian citizens. In some ways though this has been superseded by the European Convention on Human Rights. Then follows the qualifications for citizenship and the rights and obligations of citizenship. Also there is special provision to account for European Union and non-EU citizens, European voting laws.

There are many more provisions dealing with rights and freedoms, also the limitations of these. There is no death penalty, there is freedom of religion, there is freedom of speech, though some Americans have asked me about Holocaust denial laws in Belgium. I did not know until looking it up but yes, we have them and it is illegal to deny, diminish or sympathize with any of the actions of Nazi Germany. There is freedom of association, freedom of assembly and the usual rights most people today take for granted in the civilized world. The next part is the one probably most people will find confusing because it deals with the delegation of power through all the different levels. There is the European Union level, the federal level, the regional level and it all can be quite complicated to understand.

This is Title III and it is the largest part of the Constitution, very much larger than all the other parts even put together. On the highest level, dealing with European Union, treaties and government agreements handle that. On the federal level it is the King, the Senate and Chamber of Deputies (of course though the King is expected to sign whatever law the government presents to him). The King has, in name, the executive power but it is the federal government together that actually wields that power instead of the King. Finally, Articles 38 and 39 of Title III detail the powers that are held by the regions and the communities and these have naturally been the subject of the most argument and controversy over the years. One area not changing much is that dealing with the King, it is just not tolerated that he have as much influence as in the past. The biggest recent change was the abolition of Salic law so that older girls can take the throne instead of only boys.

I will try to explain this, but even for me it is complicated. The communities and regions each have their own governments with power over certain areas as put in the Constitution. There is the Flemish Parliament, the Parliament of the French Community and the Parliament of the German-Speaking Community. In Flanders, the Flemish Parliament represents both the region and the community. This is not always the case though as in Wallonie there are two different bodies, the Parliament of the French Community and also the Wallonie Parliament. Not everyone in the community parliament is a member of the regional parliament but every member of the regional parliament is a member of the community parliament (keeping up?). Members often serve in more than one so that French-speaking politicians from Brussels can serve in the Brussels capital parliament and also the French community parliament. But, except for senators, one cannot serve in a community or regional parliament at the same time as serving in the federal parliament in Brussels. These are all responsible for cultural and linguistic matters within their areas (outside federal institutions) but there have been long arguments recently over these bodies being given more control over taxes, income distribution and financial things.

Finally the Constitution establishes the judicial system (Constitutional, military, labor and law courts and that stuff) and finally the local governments, which are the provinces and cities to manage their administration. Also I should mention that the German-speaking community does not have quite the same privliges of the other major communities. Their powers can be changed at the federal level without a full majority and that would be pretty impossible since the German-speaking community is so small, consisting of areas formerly of Germany that Belgium was given as compensation after the World War One.

So, is that a sufficient summary of the Belgian Constitution? Many people are probably like me, when government issues of jurisdiction and these things come up I lose interest fast for it being so boring and complicated. When I have been told it is important to understand, I don’t think so because it always seems that all the time something is being changed or at least trying to be changed with one side or the other saying this or that change is just about to happen. So, I justify my laziness saying why learn all the details now when it will just be changing again anyway? I hope I have given some helpful information but I know I cannot explain everything because much of it I do not know or don’t remember from when I was taught. When I came to United States for some education, one of the things I noticed was people carrying the U.S. Constitution in their pocket! It was a little booklet in their pocket and this was a shock to me. As I explained, this we could not do in Belgium since the Constitution would probably be the size of an encyclopedia! That is a little exaggeration but it did make an impression on me, considering especially how big America is, how small Belgium is and how the U.S. government has been around for a century longer than the Belgian government of today.