Non-governmental organisations dedicated to protecting human health will soon be able, like environmental protection organisations, to qualify as part of the “public concerned” in urban and/or environmental permitting procedures. This will broaden the range of organisations that may challenge a permitting decision, adding a new dimension to future permitting procedures.

The Flemish Environmental Permitting Decree (Omgevingsvergunningsdecreet – OVD) defines the public concerned as natural or legal persons, associations or organisations that are affected or likely to be affected by an urban and/or environmental permit, or that have an interest in the decision concerning such a permit (Article 2, 1° OVD).
Qualifying as part of the public concerned gives these persons and organisations several opportunities to participate in a permitting procedure. During the public consultation, for example, they may submit their views, comments and objections. Subject to certain conditions, they may also lodge an administrative appeal against a decision taken at first administrative instance or bring proceedings before the Council for Permit Disputes against a decision taken at final administrative instance.
The status of “public concerned” therefore gives third parties a formal role in the permitting procedure, ranging from participation during the public consultation to challenging a permitting decision.
Certain non-governmental organisations (NGOs) benefit from an important presumption in this respect: they are deemed to have an interest. To date, this presumption has applied only to NGOs dedicated to environmental protection.
An amending decree of 10 July 2026, which transposes the revised European Industrial Emissions Directive (IED 2.0) into Flemish legislation, extends the existing presumption to NGOs dedicated to protecting human health.
As a result, not only NGOs active in environmental protection, but also health organisations will be deemed to have an interest. This amendment forms part of the broader European framework governing public participation and access to justice in environmental matters and is consistent with the Aarhus Convention.
The extension does not mean that every association active in the field of health will automatically be able to bring proceedings. Health organisations will remain subject to the conditions laid down in the OVD and the applicable admissibility requirements.
The case law of the Council for Permit Disputes concerning associations already provides some guidance in this respect. Relevant considerations include whether the association pursues a sufficiently specific collective interest, whether that interest is affected by the contested decision, and whether the association is genuinely and consistently active in accordance with its statutory purpose.
How exactly these criteria will be applied to health organisations relying on the new presumption for the first time will have to be clarified by future case law of the Council for Permit Disputes.
The decree has now been definitively adopted. The Flemish Parliament adopted the text on 8 July 2026, and the decree was sanctioned and promulgated on 10 July 2026. It was subsequently published in the Belgian Official Gazette on 13 August 2026.
However, the new rules have not yet entered into force. Article 23 provides that the decree will enter into force on a date to be determined by the Flemish Government. If the Flemish Government does not set an earlier date, the new rules will enter into force no later than 1 January 2027.
As of today, no earlier date of entry into force has been set. Health organisations therefore cannot yet rely on this new category of the public concerned.
For companies and developers, this means that the range of potential appellants will soon become broader. In addition to environmental organisations, health organisations will also be able to rely on their status as part of the public concerned once the new rules have entered into force.
For health organisations, the key takeaway is that any organisation considering challenging an urban and/or environmental permit because of its potential impact on human health would be well advised to assess now whether its statutory purpose, actual activities and geographical scope of operation allow it to do so.
Our specialists from the Real Estate Team are closely monitoring the further implementation of these rules and would be pleased to advise you on their impact on ongoing and future permitting procedures.
I am looking for a specialist in

05.11.2026
•Real Estate, Renting and Co-ownership, Andersen in Belgium
Sustainable, green, energy-efficient or even climate-neutral: these terms have become commonplace in real estate communications. From the end of September, however, the use of such claims will be subject to stricter rules. The new rules aim to better protect consumers against misleading environmental claims. For businesses, the message is clear: commercial communications will need to be more precise.

05.11.2026
•Employment Law, Andersen in Belgium
Employers must make sure that their internal policies are up date according to Belgium’s PIA and prepare for a stricter time registration obligation.

03.11.2026
•Tax Law, Andersen in Belgium
In its judgment of 18 June 2026, the Belgian Court of Cassation settled an important question concerning the deductibility of expenses incurred in making a holiday residence available to a company director: must these expenses be capped at the amount of the benefit in kind (BIK) taxed in the hands of the director? The Court answered in the negative.

03.11.2026
•Tax Law, Andersen in Belgium
In a rather surprising judgment of 14 September 2026 (F.23.0097.F), the Belgian Court of Cassation failed to correctly identify the legislature's objectives when introducing the flat-rate tax regime for copyright and related rights income. The courts should swiftly distance themselves from this judgment!