Brussels-hall-Vilvorde

See also: BHV

The legal district of Brussels , commonly called Brussels-Hall-Vilvorde (BHV) is a legal district and a electoral constituency of Belgium.

Geography

The district extends on the territory from two areas: Brussels-Capital and the Flemish Area, of two linguistic areas: respectively bilingual and Dutchwoman, and of two provincial territories: the territory extraprovincial Brussels-Capital and the the Flemish Brabant. From there, the district also arises from the competence of two communities, the Flemish Communauté (all the territory) and the French community (Brussels only). The federal services must also respect different laws linguistics S according to the commune.

The district is thus composed of two different entities, bilingual (French and Dutch) in Brussels and unilingual (Dutch) in the Flemish Brabant. Who more is, there exists a difference between the urban character of Brussels and the rather rural character of Hal and Vilvorde.

Since the Belgian Revolution of 1830, this district is used for the elections for the Chambre and the Sénat. By the bilingualism of the entity of Brussels, with clear French-speaking majority, it is possible to vote in all the district for French-speaking parties. For the Senate and the the European Parliament, Belgium is only divided into two districts, a Dutchwoman and a Frenchwoman. Brussels-hall-Vilvorde belongs to both.

Problem

From the point of view of the constitutional partition of Belgium in two linguistic areas, this arrangement is contrary with the constitution since the establishment of the three areas in 1988. The situation became more complicated since the union of the districts arrondissementales to the provincial districts in 2002.

This irrefutable fact is condemned by the Court of arbitration like contradictory to the Principe of equality: the French-speaking inhabitants of the Flemish Brabant would have rights that the Dutch-speaking inhabitants of the Walloon Brabant would not have. However, for the French-speaking parties of Belgium, they are the Dutch-speaking minority inhabitants of Brussels who profit from rights (via bilingualism of Brussels) that the French-speaking inhabitants of the Flemish Brabant do not have (whereas they are majority in several communes where there is not even official bilingualism but a Dutch unilinguism). This thorny question is thus very relative according to the adopted point of view. Who more is, the Court of arbitration denounces the fusion of the Flemish lists of BHV with those of the district of Leuwen: what amounts putting these Flemish lists in " compétition" and is unequal with respect to the other Flemish lists of the other districts.

By a vote de facto off-shore, the bilingualism of Brussels flashes back on its periphery because it constitutes a Francization de facto in the 6 common to facilities of the Flemish periphery, communes today mainly French-speaking.

The partisans of current form of the district announce that article 63 of the constitution makes it possible to the legislator to organize the districts as it decides some, without damage of the organization of the linguistic areas.

In certain circles of the Flemish Movement, one announces that the legislator expressed himself for provincial districts, which was not possible in the case of Brussels-Hall-Vilvorde and that, at this place, the candidates are not treated of equal footing. The stop of the Court of arbitration confirms this inequality.

Under this situation a certain fear in the Flemish periphery of the considerable surge of the French-speaking people shows through. In some Common to facilities, the percentage of the French-speaking people is already from almost 80%.

For a few years, all the Flemish political parties have incorporated the request of the division of this district in their programs. The point was underlined as being carrying out immediately in the Flemish pact of coalition of 2004, although neither the Flemish Parlement nor the Flemish Gouvernement is qualified on the matter. Indeed, division can be realized only at the federal level.

The Flemish parties moreover became complicated the task, because they gave each other a load which they could not only carry out. Because, although division can be accepted with a simple majority in the federal Parliament, that the Flemish parties have together, the French-speaking group can block the law by calling upon the Alarm bell, a kind of Right to veto in the situations where the interests of the communities are in danger. The French community does not have interest with a division of the district, because that would induce an inequality for the French-speaking people of the Flemish Brabant. In addition, the burgomasters of the Flemish communes ask for an immediate division now, without compensations. That makes to the model of gaufrier traditional Belgian (when a community obtains something, the other must also obtain something), which is difficult in this case. Flemish asks in addition to the secondary guarantees for the Dutch-speaking ones of Brussels which, like small minority, can lose the support of the Dutch-speaking periphery by the separation of this periphery.

In spring 2005, although it dominated the political life for a long time, division was not adopted, the compensations required by the French-speaking people being too important. At all events, the May 18th 2007, a solution must be found. Indeed, the court gave the legislator four years to rectify the situation, but naturally it did not indicate if that were to be done in the direction of more or less of bilingualism. Currently, the scission of the district is discussed rough between French-speaking parties and Dutch-speaking parties within the framework of the formation of the future federal government.

The possible solutions are:

  1. a return to districts arrondissementales with maintenance of a heterogeneous district
  2. to extend the bilingual district to parts of the the Walloon Brabant.
  3. to create a large district for all the country.
  4. as well as to introduce all the common to facilities at the same time into the Dutch-speaking district in the French-speaking district (what would cause logical to make them officially bilingual, only condition for the French-speaking people of accepting the scission of the district), this without incorporating these 6 communes in the Area of Brussels-Capital.
  5. to rigorously follow the provincial districts and thus complete division.
  6. to change the linguistic Border, i.e. to transfer certain communes from the Flemish territory to the bilingual territory. It is a claim of some French-speaking parties.

In all the debate, the Dutch-speaking ones appear to want to limit bilingualism, whereas the French-speaking people want to extend it by principle of equity compared to the bilingualism whose enjoys the Dutch-speaking minority Brussels.

Communes

The district is composed of the following communes:

Hall-Vilvorde

The administrative Arrondissement of Hall-Vilvorde (Market-Vilvoorde) is composed of the 35 following communes:

Brussels-capital

External bond

  • Stop of the Court of arbitration
  • Pavia Group, asking a federal district
  • Widening of Brussels in exchange of “BHV”? , Of the Bubbles (January 15th, 2005)

Random links:The arrival | Urdens | Henri Sanz | Be 1 | Championship of anglophone Canada de Scrabble | Talkoot