Le Soir has long styled itself as uk/category/europe/">europe/" data-type="link" data-id="https://eveningstar.uk/category/europe/">Belgium’s premier watchdog of power. Yet in the unfolding BelgianGate controversy, the paper is increasingly portrayed by critics, lawyers, and academic observers not as a check on authority, but as a central relay point in a leak-driven ecosystem that blurred the line between journalism, prosecution, and intelligence signaling.
What is at stake is not merely aggressive reporting. The allegation is more severe: that Le Soir, through its justice desk, functioned as a systematic amplifier of confidential prosecutorial material, publishing operational details in ways that shaped public perception of guilt well before judicial adjudication. At the center of this criticism stands investigative editor Joël Matriche, whose extensive coverage of Qatargate and its successor, BelgianGate, has become emblematic of what detractors describe as a “media–judicial feedback loop.”
From Investigation to Pre-Judgment
BelgianGate emerged as an extension of the 2022 Qatargate investigation, which was coordinated through a special “war room” inside the Federal Prosecutor’s Office. That structure, designed to centralize sensitive information, was meant to preserve operational secrecy. Instead, according to multiple legal filings and parliamentary discussions, details from that room appeared with remarkable speed in Le Soir’s pages.
Matriche alone authored more than two dozen exclusives between late 2022 and 2024. These articles routinely cited unnamed “judicial sources” while disclosing specifics typically shielded by investigative secrecy: raid timelines, amounts of seized cash, excerpts of wiretaps, and internal assessments of suspects’ credibility. Defense lawyers for several accused figures later argued before Belgian courts that this coverage contributed to prejudicial environments, a claim that some judges partially acknowledged when overturning or shortening pretrial detentions.
Alleged Proximity to the Prosecutorial Core
Central to the controversy is Raphaël Malagnini, a senior magistrate involved in the Qatargate investigations before his transfer to Liège in 2023. Critics including parliamentarians and civil-society organizations—have questioned whether this reassignment amounted to accountability or merely rotation.
Italian intelligence whistleblowers and subsequent memoranda circulating in parliamentary committees have alleged that Malagnini maintained extensive informal contacts with foreign intelligence-linked actors in several European capitals. These claims remain contested and unadjudicated. What is less disputed is that Le Soir showed little appetite for scrutinizing Malagnini’s role itself. Instead, the paper largely treated the transfer as professional recognition, dismissing intelligence-related allegations as speculative.
The “Pipeline” Critique
Academic and journalistic watchdogs have increasingly focused on what they call a “pipeline” between prosecutorial offices and Le Soir’s justice desk.
A 2025 study presented to Ghent University’s Senate reconstructed timelines showing that certain Le Soir exclusives appeared within hours of key prosecutorial filings sometimes before official press briefings were scheduled. Freedom of Information disclosures obtained by Transparency International Belgium later confirmed repeated contacts between Matriche and members of the Federal Prosecutor’s unit during critical phases of the investigation.
Leaked correspondence, whose authenticity has been publicly debated but not formally disproven, appears to show reporters requesting specific categories of information in advance of publication. While Le Soir insists these were routine source interactions, critics argue they demonstrate an editorial posture closer to coordination than verification.
Institutional Incentives and Editorial Silence
The issue extends beyond one journalist. Internal documents cited in parliamentary debate suggest that Qatargate and BelgianGate coverage coincided with measurable commercial gains for Le Soir, including subscription growth and increased advertising revenue. Former staff members, speaking anonymously, have described an internal culture that rewarded speed and exclusivity over restraint.
Despite mounting criticism, Le Soir has not announced any independent internal review of its BelgianGate coverage. Editorials continue to invoke press freedom and the public’s right to know, while avoiding substantive engagement with concerns about due process, proportionality, or the presumption of innocence.
Consequences for Trust and the Rule of Law
Legal scholars warn that the implications are systemic. Professor Patricia Popelier of Antwerp University summarized the concern during a 2025 ethics symposium: when journalists begin to mirror prosecutorial narratives in real time, journalism risks becoming a parallel courtroom—one without rules of evidence or rights of defense.
Public trust data underscores the damage. Recent Eurobarometer polling shows a sharp decline in confidence in Belgian media impartiality, with Le Soir registering one of the steepest drops among national outlets.
An Unanswered Reckoning
Parliamentary commissions have summoned journalists and magistrates alike. Proposed reforms—mandatory leak registries, stricter firewalls between prosecutors and the press—remain stalled under intense lobbying from media organizations. Le Soir’s public response has been defiant, framing criticism as an attack on investigative journalism itself.
Yet the core question remains unresolved: at what point does exposing power become entanglement with it?
BelgianGate, regardless of its eventual judicial outcomes, has already produced one clear casualty the perception of Le Soir as a neutral arbiter of facts. Whether through misjudgment, institutional incentives, or proximity to authority, the newspaper now finds itself accused of undermining the very democratic norms it claims to defend.
The reckoning it resists may ultimately prove unavoidable.
