Case Overview: Digitalization of the Belgian Justice System

Case Metadata

• Case ID: case-002-belgian-justice-digitalization
• Status: Active Investigation
• Date Opened: 2026-01-28
• Last Updated: 2026-01-28
• Priority: High
• Lead Investigator: DOGE Europe Research Team

Executive Summary

Belgium's justice system has long been criticized for its outdated IT infrastructure and paper-based processes. Multiple digitalization initiatives have been launched over the past two decades, consuming significant public funds while delivering limited results. Courts still rely heavily on paper files, fax machines remain in use, and interoperability between judicial databases is minimal. The lack of a coherent digital strategy has led to fragmented systems, repeated failed projects, and a justice system that lags far behind European peers.

This DOGE Europe investigation examines the systematic failures in the digitalization of Belgium's justice system, analyzing the governance, procurement, spending, and outcomes of successive IT modernization programs. The investigation will assess whether public funds were spent effectively, identify accountability gaps, and evaluate the current state of digital justice infrastructure.

Key Questions

Primary Investigation Questions

1. Budget and Spending: How much public money has been allocated and spent on justice digitalization projects over the past 15 years, and what tangible results were delivered?

2. Failed Projects: Which major IT projects failed or were abandoned, what were the root causes, and was anyone held accountable?

3. Procurement Practices: Were public procurement rules followed correctly, and were contracts awarded transparently to qualified vendors?

4. Governance Failures: What institutional and governance failures prevented the delivery of a coherent digital justice platform?

5. Current State: What is the actual current state of digitalization in Belgian courts, prosecutors' offices, and prisons?

Secondary Questions

1. How does Belgium's justice digitalization compare to neighboring countries (Netherlands, France, Germany)?

2. What role did political fragmentation and ministerial turnover play in the repeated failures?

3. Are there conflicts of interest between IT vendors and political decision-makers?

4. What is the impact of failed digitalization on citizens' access to justice and case processing times?

5. What are the current plans (if any) for a unified digital justice platform, and are they realistic?

Key Entities

Government Bodies

• FOD Justitie / SPF Justice — Federal Public Service Justice, responsible for court administration
• Ministerraad / Conseil des Ministres — Belgian federal cabinet
• Minister van Justitie — Minister of Justice (multiple holders over investigation period)

IT Systems and Projects

• MaCH — Case management system for courts
• SIDIS — Prison management information system
• Just-on-web — Citizen-facing justice portal
• e-Deposit — Electronic filing system for courts
• Crossroads Bank for Justice (JKB/BCE) — Central justice data repository

Oversight Bodies

• Rekenhof / Cour des comptes — Belgian Court of Audit
• Hoge Raad voor de Justitie / Conseil supérieur de la Justice — High Council of Justice

Background

Belgium's justice system serves approximately 11.5 million citizens across a complex federal structure with three languages (Dutch, French, German), multiple judicial districts, and fragmented political responsibility. Digitalization efforts have been ongoing since the early 2000s, but the system remains one of the least digitized in Western Europe.

Key contextual factors include:

• Federal complexity: Justice is a federal competence, but political fragmentation leads to frequent ministerial changes and shifting priorities
• Legacy infrastructure: Decades of underinvestment left courts with outdated systems that are difficult to modernize
• Vendor lock-in: Long-term contracts with specific IT vendors have limited flexibility and competition
• COVID-19 impact: The pandemic exposed critical gaps when courts struggled to function remotely

Investigation Scope

In Scope

• All major justice IT projects from 2010 to present
• Budget allocations and actual expenditures on justice digitalization
• Procurement processes and vendor relationships
• Audit reports and parliamentary questions on justice IT
• Comparison with peer countries' digital justice systems
• Impact on citizens' access to justice

Out of Scope

• Broader judicial reform (substantive law changes)
• Individual case outcomes
• Non-IT related justice budget items

Deliverables

1. Comprehensive timeline of justice digitalization initiatives and their outcomes
2. Financial analysis of spending vs. deliverables
3. Procurement and vendor analysis
4. Accountability mapping (who was responsible for key decisions)
5. Comparative analysis with peer countries
6. Recommendations for structural reform