East Flanders has introduced a controversial ban on the wearing of religious and political symbols in provincial education, a decision approved by the provincial council on Wednesday.
The measure, aimed at ensuring philosophical neutrality in educational settings, has sparked political divisions, particularly within the coalition government.
The ban, effective from September 1, 2025, prohibits items such as headscarves during educational activities.
The decision was approved by the provincial council with support from the opposition party, Vlaams Belang, after the coalition partner Vooruit voted against it.
The opposition’s backing was critical in passing the proposal, highlighting significant tensions within the provincial administration.
The measure requires that no signs, symbols, or clothing expressing political or religious beliefs, or those that may undermine neutrality, be worn during any educational activity, both inside and outside the classroom.
The ban aligns with similar guidelines in the community education system, according to provincial deputies. However, the decision has led to a rift between coalition partners, particularly with Vooruit, which broke with earlier agreements.
In an unexpected move, the party voted against the rule despite its initial support for neutrality in education.
Vooruit’s decision to oppose the measure contradicted earlier commitments made in the governing accord, and the party’s explicit vote against it created internal friction. The vote was seen as a shift in Vooruit’s stance, causing discomfort within the majority coalition.
Nadia Othman, a provincial councillor from Vooruit, explained the party’s position, stating, “We, as a party, always stand for neutrality. A neutral education service, where knowledge transfer and equal opportunities are central. For us, neutrality is about actions, not attire. We advocate for freedom and oppose oppression.”
The failure to align with the governing accord prompted strong reactions from the other coalition members. The N-VA, another key partner in the administration, expressed anger, accusing Vooruit of a “betrayal” and breaching the coalition’s foundational agreements.
Kurt Moens, a legislator from the N-VA, commented, “Vooruit reneges on agreements from the governing accord, signed by Beernaert herself, and the original coalition agreement negotiated by Conner Rousseau. This is a significant breach of trust.”
Meanwhile, Vlaams Belang, which played a pivotal role in passing the ban, praised the decision as a “victory for neutrality.” Veronique Lenvain, the faction leader of Vlaams Belang, argued, “Education should be free from ideological and religious pressure.
It’s incomprehensible that parties like Vooruit refuse to defend this.” The party also succeeded in passing an amendment to end the automatic justification of absences for religious holidays not recognized by law, further consolidating its position on the issue.
The political tensions raised by the vote have left the future of the East Flanders deputation uncertain. The split within the governing coalition has led to concerns about the stability of the administration.
As unease grows within the majority, the question of whether further disagreements will arise remains open. Kurt Moens warned, “If fundamental agreements are already being broken, that does not bode well for the rest of the term.”
The controversy surrounding the religious and political symbols ban is far from over, with political fallout likely to continue as the September 2025 implementation date draws closer.
