Navigating Belgium’s Private Investigations Act: What Employers and Multinational Corporations Need to Know

BRUSSELS — The landscape of corporate governance and internal compliance in Belgium has fundamentally shifted. When Belgium’s newly minted Private Investigations Act (PIA) entered into force on December 16, 2024—replacing the antiquated Private Detectives Act of 1991—legislators intended to modernize the oversight of the security and investigation sectors. However, the legal and corporate communities are rapidly waking up to a much broader reality: the reach of the PIA extends far beyond traditional private detective agencies, directly capturing ordinary commercial enterprises, multinational groups, and HR departments that conduct in-house workplace investigations.

For any business operating in Belgium, this legislative evolution transforms standard internal inquiries—such as looking into employee theft, harassment, or corporate fraud—into potential legal minefields. Companies now risk running afoul of stringent licensing mandates, procedural prerequisites, and data protection hurdles unless they meticulously evaluate their internal structures against the new statute.

Main Facts: The Scope and Impact of the PIA

At its core, the Private Investigations Act regulates activities that involve gathering information about individuals to safeguard legal or corporate interests during actual or potential conflicts. While businesses have historically treated internal investigations as an exclusive, private matter of operational management, the PIA changes the ground rules.

An internal investigation service is triggered under the PIA when a business satisfies specific cumulative criteria:

• The activity involves collecting information on individuals.
• It aims to protect the legitimate interests of the organization.
• It occurs within the context of an actual or potential dispute, conflict, or allegation of misconduct.
• The activity is organized on a structural basis (such as having investigative duties explicitly written into an employee’s job description or maintaining a dedicated compliance, internal audit, or security unit).

The Multinational and Cross-Border Conundrum

For multinational corporations, the implications are especially profound. Investigations executed by a centralized regional group function or an international compliance team on behalf of Belgian subsidiaries are classified under the PIA as being conducted for the business’s own purposes rather than for third parties. Consequently, global compliance, internal audit, security, and human resources teams evaluating employee misconduct within Belgium must comply with Belgian statutory standards—even if the physical headquarters of that investigating team is located outside of Belgium, elsewhere in Europe, or globally.

Furthermore, the Act introduces severe licensing mandates. Conducting private investigation activities without authorization from the Belgian Ministry of the Interior constitutes a serious violation. These licenses are granted for a renewable five-year period, but they come with a major catch: members of the investigative team must be Belgian nationals or maintain their primary residence within the European Economic Area (EEA) or Switzerland.

For EEA-based corporate groups, the law provides a narrow pathway: a license for an internal investigation service can be issued without a physical operating seat in Belgium, provided the Belgian authorities recognize equivalent legal guarantees originating from another EEA Member State. Conversely, for investigation functions anchored outside the EEA, no such exceptions exist. Multinationals relying on US-based or Asian-based regional compliance teams to probe Belgian subsidiaries must immediately rethink their operational models—potentially pivoting to licensed third-party investigators or external legal counsel to preserve the admissibility of their findings.

Chronology of Legislative Reform

The road to the December 2024 implementation of the PIA reflects a long-overdue legislative modernization, evolving from a framework designed for mid-20th-century private eyes to one capable of addressing modern corporate compliance realities.

• 1991: Belgium enacts the original Private Detectives Act. Tailored strictly to traditional, commercial sleuths tracking marital infidelity or petty commercial fraud, the 1991 framework proves entirely unequipped for the era of corporate compliance officers, digital forensics, internal whistleblowing channels, and globalized human resources operations.
• 2000s–2010s: As corporate regulations tighten across Europe—spurred by heightened anti-corruption standards, data privacy laws, and evolving employment rights—Belgian companies increasingly rely on sophisticated in-house compliance, HR, and audit teams. A legal gray area emerges regarding whether corporate investigators are bound by the 1991 Detective Act.
• Mid-2023 to Late 2024: Discussions surrounding the drafting and eventual parliamentary approval of the modern Private Investigations Act highlight the legislature’s intent to professionalize and strictly regulate all forms of private intelligence gathering.
• December 16, 2024: The PIA officially enters into force, repealing the 1991 statute. The broad phrasing of the Act’s definitions immediately sparks intense debate among labor lawyers and corporate compliance officers regarding its application to everyday workplace investigations.

Supporting Data and Legal Boundaries: What Is Excluded?

Not every conversation or informal fact-finding mission conducted by an employer constitutes a "private investigation" under the PIA. The law outlines clear exclusions to safeguard ordinary administrative and legal workflows:

1. Standard HR Reference Checks: Routine vetting processes—such as verifying employment history, educational credentials, and professional references of job applicants—are explicitly exempted.
2. Mandatory Legal Compliance Investigations: Inquiries executed strictly in performance of a statutory legal obligation are carved out of the PIA’s scope. This most notably includes specific whistleblowing investigations that fall squarely within the narrow parameters of the Belgian Whistleblowing Act.

However, legal experts emphasize that the whistleblower exemption is a trap for the unwary. The scope of the Belgian Whistleblowing Act is relatively narrow, whereas most corporate reporting channels are designed to catch a much wider net of ethical concerns, corporate grievances, and behavioral misconduct. Furthermore, workplace investigations rarely remain static; an inquiry launched via a protected whistleblower tip frequently expands into broader operational, financial, or interpersonal misconduct. The moment an internal investigation stretches beyond what is strictly mandated by the underlying law, the entire proceeding risks falling back under the rigorous, full-compliance mandates of the PIA.

The Human Resources Exception: A Narrow Safe Harbor

Recognizing the administrative paralysis total compliance could impose on day-to-day employment management, the PIA carves out a specific exception for human resources professionals.

HR personnel who execute investigative activities concerning their own employer’s legal entity and its workforce—specifically in the context of an "incident investigation"—are exempt from holding an official identification card and are excused from standard licensing requirements.

However, this exception comes with critical caveats:

• Partial Exemption Only: While HR professionals are spared the licensing burden, all other substantive provisions of the PIA (including data privacy safeguards and interview protocols) continue to apply in full.
• Undefined Terminology: The PIA neglects to formally define the term "incident investigation." Nevertheless, the explanatory memorandum accompanying the legislation suggests that once misconduct is identified or reasonably suspected, an incident investigation may legitimately include reviewing CCTV footage, pulling electronic access control data, examining badge-reader logs, electronic locks, and interviewing involved colleagues.
• Strict Judicial Interpretation: Because the statute does not crystal-clear the exact boundaries of the HR exception, legal analysts warn that courts will interpret the provision narrowly.

Official Responses and Strategic Industry Implications

Employment law practitioners and corporate compliance heads across Europe are actively dissecting the ramifications of the PIA. Marga Caproni, Partner and head of the Belgian Labour & Employment practice at Squire Patton Boggs, has been at the forefront of advising multinational enterprises on how to adapt to the new framework.

Legal authorities warn that corporate complacency could carry severe legal and procedural penalties. If an employer conducts an internal investigation without recognizing that it triggers the PIA—and consequently fails to secure the necessary Ministry of the Interior licenses or adhere to statutory procedural rules—the fallout can cripple the employer’s legal standing in subsequent employment tribunals.

Disgruntled employees facing disciplinary termination or dismissal for cause are expected to challenge the validity of internal investigations. Employees and their legal counsel will likely argue that investigative findings gathered by unlicensed in-house teams or non-compliant HR structures violate public order statutes. Consequently, defense attorneys will move to have these findings declared inadmissible as evidence in dismissal proceedings, potentially leaving employers defenseless against wrongful termination claims or rendering severance agreements legally vulnerable.

Implications for Corporate Operations: How Businesses Must Adapt

To mitigate these operational and legal risks, businesses with a physical or commercial footprint in Belgium must take immediate, proactive steps to audit their internal compliance and investigative frameworks.

1. Conduct a Comprehensive Audit of Investigative Functions

Employers must map out who within their corporate structure handles workplace inquiries. Businesses must evaluate whether teams in HR, internal audit, security, or compliance routinely gather personal data to address workplace grievances, security breaches, or policy violations. If these activities are performed on a structural basis, companies must determine whether they meet the threshold of an "internal investigation service."

2. Evaluate Geographic Footprints and Licensing Needs

Multinational groups must assess whether their regional compliance hubs meet the residency and licensing standards mandated by the Belgian Ministry of the Interior. If centralized compliance functions are located outside the EEA, companies must abandon the practice of deploying those teams directly into Belgium for investigative tasks. Instead, organizations must establish alternative pathways, such as partnering with licensed Belgian private investigation agencies or engaging external legal counsel to lead sensitive inquiries.

3. Tighten the Scope of HR Incident Investigations

Given that the HR exception must be interpreted strictly, human resources departments must exercise extreme caution. HR professionals must ensure that their investigative fact-finding remains tightly bound to immediate, internal workplace incidents. Any inquiry that drifts into complex corporate fraud, systemic financial audits, or matters outside standard employee misconduct risks forfeiting the HR exemption, exposing the company to regulatory penalties.

4. Prepare for Judicial Scrutiny

With employee litigation expected to test the boundaries of the PIA, documentation is paramount. Employers must ensure that every step of an internal inquiry is meticulously documented, legally sound, and executed with an acute awareness of data protection frameworks, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

In the next installment of this three-part series, we will examine the strict procedural rules governing how an investigation under the PIA must be conducted. This will include an in-depth analysis of GDPR intersections, prohibited fields of investigation, mandatory interview protocols, the procedural rights of data subjects, and the direct legal consequences of non-compliance.

For tailored guidance on how the Belgian Private Investigations Act impacts your commercial operations and workforce management, business leaders are encouraged to reach out to Marga Caproni, Partner and head of the Belgian Labour & Employment practice.