Our history |
The history of Committee P had seven pivotal moments.
1. The conclusions of the commission of inquiry into the Brabant killings
The May 1988 parliamentary commission of inquiry into the approach taken to tackling organised crime and terrorism (or the 'first commission of inquiry into the Brabant killings' for short) drew a number of conclusions regarding monitoring of the police:
"[...] An external body with the task of monitoring all those with policing powers should be established, as internal oversight has been found wanting. [...] This oversight body would have a supervisory role rather than any disciplinary function. In other words, it would be in charge of monitoring how police duties are performed and should report regularly to the Government and to Parliament"[1].
The commission of inquiry's report also painted a picture of a dysfunctional police due to various factors including:
[1] Free translation of a passage from Parliamentary Documents, Chamber of Representatives, 1989-1990, no. 59/8, p. 367 (in Dutch and French).
The May 1988 parliamentary commission of inquiry into the approach taken to tackling organised crime and terrorism (or the 'first commission of inquiry into the Brabant killings' for short) drew a number of conclusions regarding monitoring of the police:
"[...] An external body with the task of monitoring all those with policing powers should be established, as internal oversight has been found wanting. [...] This oversight body would have a supervisory role rather than any disciplinary function. In other words, it would be in charge of monitoring how police duties are performed and should report regularly to the Government and to Parliament"[1].
The commission of inquiry's report also painted a picture of a dysfunctional police due to various factors including:
- high levels of mistrust and a lack of solidarity among investigators and between the police and the magistracy;
- rivalry between police forces, exacerbated by differing statuses, recruitment procedures, training measures and fields of activity;
- poor coordination between police forces;
- the undemocratic nature of aspects of some policing methods;
- significant issues relating to the management of investigations;
- overlaps between the powers of various police forces.
[1] Free translation of a passage from Parliamentary Documents, Chamber of Representatives, 1989-1990, no. 59/8, p. 367 (in Dutch and French).
2. Pentecost Plan I and the promulgation of the Organic Law of 18 July 1991.
Following up on the report of the commission of inquiry mentioned above, a Government press release issued on 5 June 1990 set out a programme covering policing, citizen security and the fight against crime, better known as 'Pentecost Plan I'.
This presented various action points:
At the heart of Pentecost Plan I are the following issues: the coordination of policing policy, changes to criminal policy, structural adjustments to the operation of the police and intelligence services, and the implementation of the Policing Act.
Pursuant to Pentecost Plan I, in 1991 the Government came up with a proposed arrangement for monitoring the police. This was designed to meet three key objectives:
At sittings on 27 and 28 February and 12 and 13 July 1991, the two legislative chambers adopted the Organic Law on monitoring police forces and intelligence services, which was then signed by the King on 18 July 1991 and published in the Belgian Official Gazette on 26 July 1991. This Organic Law has been amended on a number of occasions in the intervening years.
Following up on the report of the commission of inquiry mentioned above, a Government press release issued on 5 June 1990 set out a programme covering policing, citizen security and the fight against crime, better known as 'Pentecost Plan I'.
This presented various action points:
- tackling structural, institutional and mentality issues;
- striving to safeguard and respect democratic rights and freedoms so as to provide transparency and efficiency, and stressing the responsibility of all the stakeholders involved in policing;
- focusing on qualitative rather than quantitative aspects.
At the heart of Pentecost Plan I are the following issues: the coordination of policing policy, changes to criminal policy, structural adjustments to the operation of the police and intelligence services, and the implementation of the Policing Act.
Pursuant to Pentecost Plan I, in 1991 the Government came up with a proposed arrangement for monitoring the police. This was designed to meet three key objectives:
- respect for citizens' constitutional rights and their fundamental rights and freedoms;
- effectiveness (and efficiency);
- coordination of the various police forces.
At sittings on 27 and 28 February and 12 and 13 July 1991, the two legislative chambers adopted the Organic Law on monitoring police forces and intelligence services, which was then signed by the King on 18 July 1991 and published in the Belgian Official Gazette on 26 July 1991. This Organic Law has been amended on a number of occasions in the intervening years.
3. The 1998 extension of powers
In 1998, the Government decided to establish a collegiate body to examine appeals against security clearances (i.e. official authorisations to access confidential data) being granted or withheld. The then Government considered it vital that the Chairman or another member of Standing Committee P be part of this body, known as the 'Appeal Body for Security Clearances', and therefore the Chairman of Committee P was appointed to sit on this body along with the Chairman of the Standing Intelligence Agencies Review Committee (Committee I) and the Director of the Data Protection Authority's Litigation Chamber.
In 1998, the Government decided to establish a collegiate body to examine appeals against security clearances (i.e. official authorisations to access confidential data) being granted or withheld. The then Government considered it vital that the Chairman or another member of Standing Committee P be part of this body, known as the 'Appeal Body for Security Clearances', and therefore the Chairman of Committee P was appointed to sit on this body along with the Chairman of the Standing Intelligence Agencies Review Committee (Committee I) and the Director of the Data Protection Authority's Litigation Chamber.
4. The 2004-2005 extension of powers
The Programme Law of 27 December 2004 conferred on Standing Committee P a whole range of other monitoring powers relating to the supervision of security services and security officers performing their duties for a State-owned public transport company (SNCB/NMBS, STIB/MIVB, TEC, De Lijn), based on an amendment to the Law of 10 April 1990 regulating private and personal security, recently repealed by the Law of 2 October 2017 regulating private and personal security, which reaffirmed Committee P's competence to exercise oversight over the above-mentioned services and officers.
Therefore, on this site the term 'police forces' is used in a broad sense to cover the Federal Police, the local police forces, the special inspection services and the security services used by a public transport company.
In 2005, the legislature decided to extend the rules on security clearances to security certificates and advice, resulting in the appeal body being granted the same adjudication powers with regard to any authorisation, or refusal, to issue any such certificate or advice. These documents are required for access to certain premises, buildings or grounds or to take up very specific roles.
The Programme Law of 27 December 2004 conferred on Standing Committee P a whole range of other monitoring powers relating to the supervision of security services and security officers performing their duties for a State-owned public transport company (SNCB/NMBS, STIB/MIVB, TEC, De Lijn), based on an amendment to the Law of 10 April 1990 regulating private and personal security, recently repealed by the Law of 2 October 2017 regulating private and personal security, which reaffirmed Committee P's competence to exercise oversight over the above-mentioned services and officers.
Therefore, on this site the term 'police forces' is used in a broad sense to cover the Federal Police, the local police forces, the special inspection services and the security services used by a public transport company.
In 2005, the legislature decided to extend the rules on security clearances to security certificates and advice, resulting in the appeal body being granted the same adjudication powers with regard to any authorisation, or refusal, to issue any such certificate or advice. These documents are required for access to certain premises, buildings or grounds or to take up very specific roles.
5. The 2006 extension of powers
A decision was made when establishing the Coordination Unit for Threat Assessment (CUTA), a body responsible for evaluating the threat posed by terrorism and extremism, to place it under the joint supervision of Standing Committees P and I. This brand-new monitoring task covering a new body and a new domain was a direct result of the Threat Assessment Act of 10 July 2006[1]. Since then, the Organic Law has been called the 'Organic Law of 18 July 1991 on monitoring the police and intelligence services and the Coordination Unit for Threat Assessment'.
One key element in the functioning and constitution of the CUTA is the legal obligation for 'support services' to communicate to it, either ex officio or at the request of its director, any information which is available to them in the context of their duties laid down by law and which is relevant to the performance of its tasks.
The Act of 10 July 2006 lists the support services involved and makes provision for the King to expand their number, as happened most recently with the Royal Decree of 17 August 2018[2].
The support services, which must second one or more of their members to the CUTA, are:
[1] Belgian Official Gazette of 20 July 2006 (in Dutch and French).
[2] Belgian Official Gazette of 12 September 2018 (in Dutch and French).
A decision was made when establishing the Coordination Unit for Threat Assessment (CUTA), a body responsible for evaluating the threat posed by terrorism and extremism, to place it under the joint supervision of Standing Committees P and I. This brand-new monitoring task covering a new body and a new domain was a direct result of the Threat Assessment Act of 10 July 2006[1]. Since then, the Organic Law has been called the 'Organic Law of 18 July 1991 on monitoring the police and intelligence services and the Coordination Unit for Threat Assessment'.
One key element in the functioning and constitution of the CUTA is the legal obligation for 'support services' to communicate to it, either ex officio or at the request of its director, any information which is available to them in the context of their duties laid down by law and which is relevant to the performance of its tasks.
The Act of 10 July 2006 lists the support services involved and makes provision for the King to expand their number, as happened most recently with the Royal Decree of 17 August 2018[2].
The support services, which must second one or more of their members to the CUTA, are:
- State Security and the General Intelligence and Security Service of the Armed Forces (2006);
- the Local and Federal Police (2006);
- the Federal Public Service (FPS) Finance, in particular the General Administration of Customs and Excise (2006) and the General Administration of Treasury (2018);
- the FPS Mobility and Transport and the FPS Interior, in particular the Immigration Office (2006) and the Crisis Centre Directorate-General (2018); and
- the FPS Foreign Affairs and the FPS Justice, in particular the Directorate-General for Penitentiaries and the Faiths and Organised Secularism Department (both 2018).
[1] Belgian Official Gazette of 20 July 2006 (in Dutch and French).
[2] Belgian Official Gazette of 12 September 2018 (in Dutch and French).
6. The 2018 extension of powers
With effect from 5 September 2018, in accordance with the Law on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data, Committee P has been appointed, together with Committee I, as Data Protection Authority charged with the control of the processing of personal data by CUTA and its processors carried out within the framework of the tasks as referred to in the Law of 10 July 2006 and by or under special laws.
With effect from 5 September 2018, in accordance with the Law on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data, Committee P has been appointed, together with Committee I, as Data Protection Authority charged with the control of the processing of personal data by CUTA and its processors carried out within the framework of the tasks as referred to in the Law of 10 July 2006 and by or under special laws.
7. The 2019 extension of powers
Since the entry into force on 17 June 2019 of the Act of 8 May 2019 amending the Act of 15 September 2013 on the reporting of a suspected breach of integrity within a federal administrative authority by a member of its staff, integrated police staff members have been able to use the whistleblowing system provided for by the Act of 15 September 2013 to report a suspected breach of integrity within the integrated police.
The powers this legislation confers on the Federal Ombudsmen are exercised by Standing Committee P when a suspected breach of integrity is reported by a police official.
Integrated police staff members were already able to report to Committee P any suspected breach of integrity under the procedure provided for in the Organic Law of 18 July 1991. The amended legislation provides for a new procedure featuring a new whistleblowing system, with Committee P as the external body when the whistleblower is a police official.
Since the entry into force on 17 June 2019 of the Act of 8 May 2019 amending the Act of 15 September 2013 on the reporting of a suspected breach of integrity within a federal administrative authority by a member of its staff, integrated police staff members have been able to use the whistleblowing system provided for by the Act of 15 September 2013 to report a suspected breach of integrity within the integrated police.
The powers this legislation confers on the Federal Ombudsmen are exercised by Standing Committee P when a suspected breach of integrity is reported by a police official.
Integrated police staff members were already able to report to Committee P any suspected breach of integrity under the procedure provided for in the Organic Law of 18 July 1991. The amended legislation provides for a new procedure featuring a new whistleblowing system, with Committee P as the external body when the whistleblower is a police official.