Brussels (Brussels Morning) – A misconduct inquiry targets the Brussels Regional Police Academy director, J.G., for alleged harassment by staff. The academy’s board banned him amid claims of improper behaviour. J.G. denies the allegations.
A misconduct inquiry is underway into the director of Brussels Regional Police Academy, affirms by the city’s employment prosecutor. The director understood as J.G., is blamed by multiple staff members for harassment. A detailed report on the case has not been delivered by the employment prosecutor as of yet, who emphasises J.G.’s right to the presumption of innocence.
Earlier a high-ranking officer in the Brussels West Police Zone (which includes Jette, Ganshoren, Koekelberg, Molenbeek and Saint-Agatha-Berchem), J.G. was backed to the Brussels Police Academy.
What actions has the Brussels Police Academy taken against J.G.?
According to La Capitale, the academy’s board of directors has determined to banish him from his role. The decision arises from allegations of toxic administration and unacceptable conduct towards female staff members.
What are the harassment allegations against J.G.?
It is claimed that J.G. sent improper messages to two female coworkers; a bath selfie to one and a “agreement for social and sexual services” to another. Eight other female workers have lodged official protests with an external service reliable for workplace prevention and protection.
Responding to the allegations, J.G. has refuted the claims made by one of the complainants in a statement given to La Capitale.
“An investigation has been started following a complaint of harassment,” said Valentina Marocchi, spokesperson for the employment prosecutor. “However, due to the intimate nature of this investigation, we cannot disclose any further information at this time.”Â
Why did the Brussels Court of Appeal prefer police statements?
Moreover, in 2022 judges in Strasbourg found that the Brussels Court of Appeal preferred statements made by the police officers who carried out the detention, even though the conditions of the arrest were identified by the government as being contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Court of Appeal had explained its refusal to question the incriminating comments made by the police officers because they were approved by other police officers who were attending at the time of the events but had nothing to do with the issue. But for the ECHR, these police officials were themselves defendants in a previous police brutality case initiated by Boutaffala, and they may have been unwilling to testify against colleagues. Furthermore, the police argument that Boutaffala had hit them was not approved by two independent witnesses.
The Belgian League of Human Rights stated that the ruling “sends a strong call to the Belgian authorities: it criticises how some courts give disproportionate importance to the word of the police.” The organisation also emphasised that the prosecution had insufficient evidence that Boutaffala had resisted arrest, stressing that the decision also points to a “recurring practice of filing a protest for resisting arrest as a form of revenge for an individual’s complaint of police violence.”
