The Belgian state finds itself entangled in a high-stakes legal stalemate over the potential repatriation of a convicted Islamic State member from a detention camp in Syria. DHnet reported that the federal government contested the application of daily penalty payments before the Brussels civil court on Monday, arguing that security concerns prevent authorities from facilitating the return of the thirty-something woman and her eleven-year-old daughter.
The legal saga began when an Antwerp court sentenced the woman, identified in court documents as B.C., to five years in prison in 2020 for participating in terrorist activities. That initial ruling also stripped her of Belgian citizenship. Between 2020 and 2023, several other detained women and their children were successfully repatriated to Belgium, but B.C. remained behind. Her defense attorneys, Nicolas Cohen and Luka Filipovic, maintained that the citizenship revocation kept her off previous transport lists, while state officials countered that she had simply refused to leave.
The landscape shifted dramatically in 2023 when the Antwerp Court of Appeal reversed the lower court’s decision, annulling the revocation of B.C.’s nationality. Following that reversal, the Brussels civil court ruled on June 8 that the Belgian state must actively facilitate the return of the mother and daughter within a month or face daily penalty payments of 2,500 euros, capped at a maximum of 50,000 euros.
Security Assessments and the Al-Roj Camp Impasse
Appearing before the court on Monday, the state’s legal representative argued that executing the June 8 order remains impossible due to shifting security evaluations. A confidential risk analysis conducted just a week after the civil court ruling concluded that B.C. remains radicalized. Furthermore, authorities noted that her husband is currently in Iraq and is classified as a level 3 security threat.
While the Belgian government insists it does not formally oppose the repatriation of the mother and child, state lawyers maintained that neither Kurdish and Syrian authorities nor mandated NGOs can guarantee safe transit or adequate post-return monitoring. Compounding the risk, B.C. holds dual Belgian-Turkish citizenship, meaning she could potentially secure travel documents through Turkey and return independently, entirely outside the surveillance radar of European intelligence services.
This array of potential hazards has led the state to withhold its formal approval for local Kurdish authorities to release B.C. from the Al-Roj camp. Conversely, the defense argues that the state’s refusal to issue necessary travel documents and communicate its lack of opposition to local authorities creates an artificial barrier to compliance.
The Court Demands Concrete Solutions
Confronted with what she characterized as a circular argument, the presiding judge of the appeal court expressed clear frustration during Monday’s hearing. The bench ultimately adjourned the dossier to November 16, directing both legal teams to present actionable solutions for breaking the deadlock.
The court pressed the parties on several key operational questions, asking whether B.C. and her daughter are genuinely free to move, whether they are permitted to leave the Al-Roj camp, and what specific steps the defense proposes. While acknowledging that the judiciary cannot directly force the Belgian state to negotiate with foreign actors, the court’s president signaled that vague risk assessments can no longer serve as an indefinite justification for inaction.
