Belgian right-wing activist and former MP Dries Van Langenhove was convicted for a second time on hate speech charges by a Belgian court on Monday, 25 May. According to the ruling, Van Langenhove’s statements were based on ‘scientific evidence and statistics’, yet were presented in a ‘certain way’ that still constituted a criminal offence.
The case stems from a February 2024 lecture at the Catholic University of Leuven in which Van Langenhove linked mass migration to crime and deteriorating living conditions. According to his statement, the court acknowledged that he had not spread false information, but nevertheless concluded that his framing of the issue violated Belgium’s anti-racism laws.
‘I have just been convicted a second time for “hate speech” and it is only due to a technicality that I could not immediately be sent to jail,’ Van Langenhove wrote. He argued that the ruling effectively criminalized criticism of mass migration itself, warning that it establishes a precedent against even moderate immigration scepticism.
Quoting directly from the judgment, Van Langenhove highlighted the court’s reasoning: ‘Even if all of the statements made by Van Langenhove are based on scientific evidence and statistics, it makes no difference to the criminal intent. Van Langenhove is not charged with spreading false information.’ The judge instead argued that his presentation of the facts allegedly ‘incites hatred’.
‘That’s a lot of words just to say he wants to send me to prison for speaking the truth,’ Van Langenhove responded. He added that even Belgian mainstream media acknowledged the unusual nature of the verdict, writing that ‘it did not matter to the court that Van Langenhove was quoting scientific sources.’
The Belgian activist also claimed prosecutors failed to demonstrate how his speech directly incited hatred or violence. ‘The only argument they present is that I created a “hostile atmosphere of us versus them” in regards to migrants,’ he wrote, adding that this was completely false because his ‘enemy’ was not migrants themselves but those orchestrating mass migration.
Van Langenhove further revealed that he is currently facing ‘a dozen active criminal investigations for hate speech’ and has already spent more than €420,000 on legal fees. ‘If you live in a country that still has free speech, never let them touch it, however noble they make the motives sound, because this is where it leads to,’ he warned.
The verdict immediately triggered outrage among conservative and free speech advocates across Europe and the United States. Elon Musk reposted the story on X with the caption: ‘Thank Heaven for the First Amendment in America!’
American physician and commentator Kevin Bass wrote: ‘The truth is called hateful in Belgium. Therefore speaking it is against the law.’ He added: ‘This is more frightening than calling the truth “misinformation”. They have stopped pretending completely. They are openly admitting that they have criminalized the truth.’
Dutch political commentator William Meijer also condemned the ruling, writing: ‘When kind lies become state-mandated and unkind truths become illegal, societies collapse.’ Referring to security concerns in Brussels, he added: ‘Even Belgian Minister of Justice Annelies Verlinden admits she does not dare walk outside in Brussels after dark. Explain why, and she’ll put you in jail.’
The case is the latest in a growing series of European hate speech prosecutions that many conservatives view as part of broader efforts by mainstream institutions to restrict dissenting opinions. One of the most high-profile recent examples was the conviction of former Finnish interior minister Päivi Räsänen by Finland’s Supreme Court earlier this year.
Räsänen was found guilty of ‘incitement against a minority group’ over a 2004 Christian pamphlet criticizing homosexuality from a biblical perspective. The court ordered parts of the publication removed from public access and destroyed, a move legal advocacy group ADF International described as a ‘striking act of censorship’.
Related article:
At a time when public debate is increasingly polarized and superficial, Hungarian Conservative remains committed to depth, intellectual honesty, and independent conservative thought.
Producing high-quality journalism requires resources. Your contribution helps us expand our coverage, reach new audiences, and keep our content accessible.
Please consider supporting our mission.
