The vice-governor of Brussels: the little-known guardian of the language laws

Brussels has a vice-governor, but no governor

It is one of the capital's institutional curiosities: Brussels has a vice-governor, but no governor. The office of governor was abolished by the sixth state reform (special law of 6 January 2014); its security, emergency-planning and crisis-management duties have since been carried out by a senior official. The vice-governor, on the other hand, lives on — with a single, very narrow mission: ensuring compliance with the laws on the use of languages in the 19 municipalities and the 19 public welfare centres (CPAS) of the administrative district of Brussels-Capital.

The general public is largely unaware that this post exists. This dossier sets out to put it in perspective: where does it come from, what does it actually do, with what resources, and how does it help (or not) the people of Brussels?

Community-driven origins: 1963, then 1995

The office is born of the law of 2 August 1963 on the use of languages in administrative matters, at the height of the community pacification (fixing of the language border, demarcation of the 19 bilingual Brussels municipalities). At the time, Brussels was part of the province of Brabant: a government commissioner bearing the title of vice-governor of Brabant was created, specifically tasked with language supervision, distinct from the provincial governor.

Everything changed with the split of the province of Brabant on 1 January 1995 (fourth state reform). Unitary Brabant broke into three: Walloon Brabant, Flemish Brabant and the administrative district of Brussels-Capital, which from then on belongs to no province. The powers of the former vice-governor were divided between the vice-governor of Brussels and the deputy of the governor of Flemish Brabant (competent for the six municipalities with language facilities in the periphery).

The successive vice-governors

Since the district was created in 1995, three people have held the office:

• Hugo Nys (1995 – 2010) — appointed; also acting governor from 2009 until his retirement.
• Jean Clément (2010 – 2012) — acting (he then combined the roles of governor and acting vice-governor).
• Jozef Ostyn (since 2012) — acting from February 2012, then permanently appointed in 2013; still in office.

What he does — and what he cannot do

The vice-governor checks the language compliance of the acts of the municipalities and the CPAS, in particular the appointments and recruitments of staff: does the person hired hold the certificate of knowledge of the second language required for a post in Brussels?

His tool: suspension. Within 40 days of receiving an act (article 65 of the coordinated laws of 18 July 1966), he may, by reasoned order, suspend its execution. But — and this is the heart of the problem — he cannot annul. Annulment lies with the regional government (the oversight authority). The vice-governor is therefore only one link in a chain: he flags, suspends, forwards; someone else decides.

Each year he draws up a report sent to the Brussels Parliament, and he stands in for the senior official/governor in the event of absence. He is appointed and dismissed by the regional government with the binding opinion of the federal government, and must demonstrate a thorough knowledge of both French and Dutch.

The figures: massive checking, minimal compliance

The annual reports (2016-2025) paint a consistent and striking picture.

• Volume checked rising then falling back: from 2,329 files in 2016 to a peak of 3,758 in 2023, then 3,199 in 2025. The CPAS long drove the volume (peak of 2,020 files in 2020), before a fall-back on the municipal side in 2025.
• Very low compliance: in 2024, only 560 files out of 3,639 were compliant, i.e. 15.4%. Most suspensions concern the contractual staff of the CPAS, where the language certificate is massively lacking.
• Record suspensions: 1,867 recruitment suspensions in 2020, a level never reached before.
• Sharply rising complaints: from 5 complaints in 2016 to a record of 61 in 2024 (the report finds « no single explanation » for it), falling back to 32 in 2025.

In other words: the service checks a great deal, finds overwhelming non-compliance… but is unable to put a stop to it.

The real influence: an « alert function »

The power of suspension is, in practice, largely symbolic. According to the leading press, barely two suspensions have been followed by an effective annulment; the recruited staff member generally remains in post « to ensure the continuity of the service ». The office-holder himself acknowledges it: if an appointment is suspended, the local administrations reconfirm their decision almost systematically, and at regional level « the expiry of the deadline is awaited ». He describes his role as an « alert function » rather than a binding power.

The resources bear out this assessment: the service operates with 4 staff, a headcount the reports describe as « critical » year after year, with a durably vacant post and repeated requests for reinforcement. No operating budget is published in the reports — from 2023 onwards, only a mention of a need for « substantial financial input » appears, with no figure.

A unique post… but not quite

Is the vice-governor a Brussels singularity?

• In Belgium: its only true twin is the deputy of the governor of Flemish Brabant, created in 1995, who has the same power of suspension for the six municipalities with language facilities in the periphery. The difference is the context: the deputy protects a French-speaking minority in unilingual Dutch-speaking territory; the vice-governor checks bilingualism in an officially bilingual region. Elsewhere (Voeren, Comines, the East Cantons), language supervision goes through ordinary district commissioners, without an equivalent power of suspension.
• In Europe: no exact equivalent. Multilingual territories generally entrust the language guarantee either to an ombudsman (Canada, Ireland, New Brunswick), or to a structural quota mechanism (South Tyrol), or to the courts. The pairing of « protecting a locally minority language + the power to suspend public administrative acts » is extremely rare.

The « lasagne »: an acknowledged overlap

The vice-governor's language supervision is a distinct oversight, running in parallel to the ordinary administrative oversight (budgets, contracts, staff), which is exercised by the regional government through Brussels Local Authorities. The latter itself acknowledges that language supervision « is not included » in its oversight and falls to « a federal government commissioner » — an overlap of powers between a check of federal origin and a regional oversight.

The full chain illustrates the institutional complexity of Brussels: the vice-governor suspends → the regional government annuls (or not) → the Permanent Language Supervision Commission (CPCL), a federal advisory body, issues non-binding opinions and may refer matters to the Council of State, the only body able to annul legally. Several links, a slender result.

A lasting post?

Despite this record, no proposal to abolish the vice-governor has been recorded in recent institutional debates. The sixth state reform abolished the governor of Brussels, but kept the vice-governor. The only reform proposals directly targeting it go, on the contrary, in the direction of strengthening it: giving the vice-governor a power of annulment (and no longer merely of suspension), and having his annual report formally debated by the regional government.

Why this matters to the people of Brussels

The office touches on a founding principle of the capital: the bilingualism of the public service. A Brussels resident must be able to be received and served in their own language, French or Dutch, by their municipality and their CPAS. On paper, the vice-governor is the guarantor of this right.

In practice, his reports above all document the persistent gap between the rule and the practice: a majority of staff recruited without the required language certificate, suspensions with no follow-up, a service of 4 people. The debate is therefore not so much about the cost of the post — never quantified — as about its real effectiveness: does an abundant check with no binding power fulfil its mission, or does it merely measure, year after year, a non-compliance it cannot correct?

What to watch

• Annual report sent to the Brussels Parliament: trends in the compliance rate and in complaints.
• Debate on powers: the question of a power of annulment (and no longer mere suspension) comes up regularly.
• Digitalisation of the oversight procedure, requested by the service since 2025.
• Articulation with the reform of the regional administration and the institutional simplification of Brussels.