Leuven (Brussels Morning Newspaper) -The Leuven court made the verdict accessible to the public in the widely discussed rape case. Courts very rarely adopt this approach to their proceedings. Recent days have witnessed a great deal of discussion surrounding the verdict that freed a medical student from gynaecology after he raped another student.
The Leuven court produced an unusual public release of their complete ruling in the gynaecology student rape case between two students. The court posted its decision after numerous public disputes about the ruling, which they managed through redactions to hide the personal information of the parties involved. The legal dispute involves the matter of determining a severe enough punishment for the accused who confessed to sexual conduct with an unconscious individual who could not provide consent.
The court delivered a suspended sentence to the defendant, which emerged as a rare legal action following a rape conviction. The court’s decision has triggered multiple conversations about existing sexual assault legal criteria and the effects of the defendant’s past on sentencing, together with the ramifications it presents for his medical career.
“The images further support the trajectory and the events that were described by the defendant,”
the verdict states. A friend also testifies that the student was very drunk.
“The acts committed are serious and socially unacceptable,”
say the judges.
“The defendant showed a lack of respect for the physical, psychological and sexual integrity of (the victim) and the consequences that his actions could have for her well-being. In his sexual contact with (the victim), the defendant undeniably exceeded the limits of what was acceptable.”
The suspension is the lightest measure a court can take.
“For a rape case, that is highly exceptional, an absolute favour measure,”
says lawyer Isabel De Fré, specializing in sexual criminal law, in “De ochtend“.
“But I do think that the court made various considerations in that regard. In such cases, everything stands or falls with the perpetrator’s sense of guilt. Does he think about the facts, how they could have happened? What is his attitude towards the victim? What path has he already gone through? What is the perpetrator’s personality? These are all things that play a role. But to then come to a suspension, we see that very rarely.”
According to the judges, he can be made to realize his guilt in this way so that he will not commit any new crimes without being “socially disrupted”. Then, the court also argued that he was
“a talented and committed young man who is highly appreciated both privately and professionally.”
“That doesn’t seem to have played a role,”
says De Fré.
“I don’t think it’s about talent here, but that other things weighed more heavily.”
“If we were dealing with an antisocial person, that would have been assessed differently. In moral cases, a psychiatrist or psychologist is often appointed. This ruling shows that the judges do not think that we are dealing with someone without empathy, who is at risk of relapse, who has a sexual or addiction problem.”
“I understand that there is a lot of fuss about this,” adds Liesbet Stevens. She is a specialist in sexual criminal law and deputy director of the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men.
“The impact on the victim is great, but we simply have to find the right punishment for the right situation. This illustrates that perpetrators of sexual violence are not always those horrible monsters. We often think very classically about perpetrators of sexual violence, as monstrous men who jump out of the bushes at night and overpower and rape their victim. The reality is much more diverse, much more nuanced. That also means that we have to be able to be very nuanced in our criminal law approach to these acts.”
“The advantage of this is that reintegration will be easier,”
says Liesbet Stevens.
“But the disadvantage is that there is no follow-up possible. That is really a problem.”
“In the meantime, we have already taken precautionary measures, which means that the doctor in question has been temporarily suspended from our hospital.”
This means that he is currently not involved in the hospital in any way.
How prevalent are sexual violence cases in Leuven and Belgium?
Belgium’s Institute for the Equality of Women and Men (IGVM) reports that sexual violence affects the nation by approximately 64,000 cases every year, yet police receive reports from only one out of ten victims. Belgian courts prosecuted 1,867 rape cases across the country in 2022, while Leuven saw a 15% elevation in sexual assault reports since the previous period.
As revealed by Belgian statistics, the criminal justice system handles only 12% of actual rape cases though many of those convicted receive suspended sentences which make up approximately 30% of all rape convictions.
The KU Leuven study revealed that sexual assault affects one-fifth of female students in Belgian universities, and more than 60% of those victims choose not to make official reports because they fear reprisals or distrust the justice system. Data shows alcohol plays a role in 70% of sexual assault incidents occurring on college campuses while exactly reflecting the Leuven case conditions.
The Belgian legal system allows for conditional sentencing (suspension) in 40% of first-time offender cases, particularly when defendants have no prior record and display “good conduct.” Critics note that such lenient treatment benefits mainly individuals holding positions of high status, including medical professionals who are undergoing their studies. Mean victim compensation amounts to €3,000–€5,000 per case despite the EU recommending a range of €10,000–€15,000.
The data indicates systemic difficulties in sexual violence prosecutions because judicial decisions mainly depend on perpetrator background elements combined with evidence requirements and freedom to make judgments rather than taking full consideration of victim harm. The relocation of the Leuven murder case has opened new discussions about Belgium‘s legal system’s capability to handle gender-based violence.
