Verstraeten quits Anderlechtse Haard inquiry committee: “A sham investigation”

Brussels MP Gilles Verstraeten has resigned from his role as rapporteur of the parliamentary inquiry committee investigating Anderlechtse Haard. According to him, the committee was never given a genuine opportunity to uncover the truth due to political obstruction, an unrealistic timetable and the absence of key documents.

“I refuse to continue lending my active support to this charade, where any meaningful investigation is being blocked under pressure from the Socialist Party (PS),” he said.

PS blocking a proper investigation

Verstraeten stresses that his decision is not a rejection of parliamentary inquiry committees as such. On the contrary, he considers them to be the most powerful oversight instrument available to parliament.

“The purpose of an inquiry committee is to establish the truth and determine political responsibility so that public policy can be corrected where necessary. That is precisely why I cannot accept the way this committee has been run,” Verstraeten said.

According to him, the PS has done everything possible to prevent a thorough investigation, while Brussels' MR has gone along with it. He also holds the other governing parties responsible for refusing to grant the committee additional time.

“The truth has been sacrificed on the altar of coalition stability.”

Months of work compressed into a few weeks

Verstraeten argues that the inquiry was undermined from the outset by an impossibly tight schedule. Within just a few weeks, members were expected to examine thousands of pages of documents, hear dozens of witnesses and produce a final report.

“That simply isn't serious,” he said. “Parliamentary inquiries typically take six to nine months. Everyone knows that conducting a proper investigation under these circumstances is impossible.”

Key documents still missing

The problems continued throughout the committee's work. The first meetings took place without a complete case file, without a clear witness list and without an agreed procedural framework.

Important documents were only provided at the last minute, while other crucial material—including internal emails and communications between those involved—remains unavailable. Chronological waiting lists and transfer records have reportedly also disappeared.

According to Verstraeten, there are strong indications that, alongside the official procedures, an informal parallel system existed within Anderlechtse Haard to circumvent the rules.

“If the goal is to uncover the truth, the committee must have access to all relevant information and enough time to investigate that parallel system. Instead, the exact opposite is happening.”

He points out that documents requested by all political groups were never submitted, while the pace of the proceedings left virtually no time to analyse the available material properly. As a result, the committee has also been unable to recall key witnesses in light of newly uncovered information.

Decisions taken outside the committee bureau

Verstraeten also criticises the committee's internal functioning. Although he served on the committee bureau as rapporteur, he says he was frequently informed about agendas and planned witnesses only at the last minute.

Minutes were distributed only during meetings, while key decisions were taken outside the agreed procedures by the chair's office.

“Meetings of the bureau were often dominated by political power plays and raw displays of force. It felt like I was back in Anderlecht's municipal council.”

He also regrets that the majority refused to appoint an independent expert to analyse the financial documents, despite this having been standard practice during the parliamentary inquiry into the Samusocial scandal.

“Apparently, digging too deep was never the intention,” Verstraeten said.

Witnesses describe a climate of fear

The hearings nevertheless revealed deeply troubling information. Witnesses spoke of a culture of fear within Anderlechtse Haard, said they feared losing their jobs and testified that they had been instructed in advance not to raise certain issues.

Several witnesses also contradicted one another, which, according to Verstraeten, only reinforces the need for further documentary investigation.

“But that is exactly what this committee has been denied: the time and the resources.”

“The people of Brussels deserve the full truth”

Verstraeten insists that the people of Brussels deserve a full and independent investigation into the alleged wrongdoing at Anderlechtse Haard, particularly the thousands of families who have been waiting for years for social housing.

He therefore refuses to endorse a final report that, in his view, will create the impression that nothing serious occurred, even though the committee was never given the opportunity to conduct a proper investigation.

“Under these circumstances, it is impossible to reach sound conclusions. At this point, only the judicial authorities may still be able to establish the truth. Brussels' democratic institutions have clearly failed in that responsibility. That is why I am stepping down as rapporteur,” Verstraeten concluded.