Flemish Government’s Plan to Dismantle M HKA’s Collection in the Name of Centralization of Art

February 18, 2026

Museum of Contemporary Art Antwerp (M HKA)

By Alexandra Kharchenko

On October 6, 2025, the Flemish Government announced plans to transform the Museum of Contemporary Art Antwerp (M HKA) into a Kunsthalle^[1]— a center for art — which would lead the museum to lose its legal status as a museum and transfer its collection to the Stedelijk Museum voor Actuele Kunst (SMAK), located in Ghent. Losing this status will have huge legal, financial, and cultural repercussions for the M HKA. In the same announcement, the government decided to postpone the long-approved project to construct a new building adjacent to the museum.

Those controversial decisions were reportedly a shock not only for the M HKA staff but also for many cultural institutions, organizations, and galleries as public funding for the arts is in decline and increasingly precarious. These concerns were expressed in open letters and petitions which included the Artistic Freedom Initiative,^[2] the Board of L’Internationale Confederation,^[3] Hans Ulrich Obrist,^[4] artistic director of Serpentine Galleries in London, Maria Balshaw, outgoing director of the U.K.’s Tate, Laurent Le Bon, director of the Centre Pompidou in Paris, and Taco Dibbets, director of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam.^[5]

Decisions regarding status of art collections and construction are part of a broader plan of restructuring the Flemish cultural landscape. The government intends to create three cultural clusters: Ostend for modern art, Antwerp for fine arts, and Ghent for contemporary and current art, where the SMAK is located. In this vision, the M HKA’s collection would be transferred to SMAK in Ghent to gather all contemporary art pieces.^[6]

The “Reorganization” of the Flemish Cultural Landscape

Terms such as reorganization^[7], centralization^[8] and pooling resources^[9] have dominated official discourse, yet what lies behind these vague formulations remains unclear.

For context, Belgium is undergoing budgetary restructuring as it faced a 4.4% budget deficit in 2024, which is expected to increase to 5.5% in 2025.^[10] Within the eurozone, Belgium is one of the worst performers;^[11] a budget restructuring was seen as necessary. One of the most impacted sectors is the cultural sector. In the past few months, major projects have been postponed, like the Brussels Kanal Museum,^[12] which was supposed to be one of Europe’s largest new arts complexes and scheduled to open by the end of this year, or the closing of the Brussels art center La Centrale for contemporary art^[13] on 22 February, 2026. All those decisions have been heavily criticized not only by the art community in Belgium but also across Europe.

However, according to the Flemish Minister of Culture Caroline Gennez, the reorganization aims to strengthen collaboration and coherence within the cultural landscape.^[14] She argues that Belgium has extensive public art collections, but fragmented, and gathering all art collections into three clusters would give more coherence^[15] and avoid fragmentation^[16] of artworks in Flanders, which still raises questions on what that means because transferring a huge curated collection of art based on long-term expertise and continuity in Antwerp to Ghent, does not seem as coherent or efficient. Therefore, this transfer is more motivated by budgetary considerations rather than artistic or cultural preservation reasons. Usually, centralizing collections reduces overall funding because the maintenance of the museum and its collection would be cut, as there would be no need for them, allowing most staff to be cut.

Artistic and Cultural Implications

The inclusion of M HKA’s collection at the SMAK raises concerns about how to preserve its identity in another museum located in another city, Ghent. First, Ghent and Antwerp have very different artistic identities. Antwerp used to be the artistic capital of the Netherlands, marked by the Flemish baroque era, the powerful institutions, and a very organized art market. Ghent served as an experimental place for artists, marked by symbolism and Flemish expressionism. Art History demonstrates that different artistic movements have shaped these cities and, in turn, affected their art collections and curatorial identity. M HKA’s collection has been built in Antwerp since 1982, shaped by the local context of the city, artistic relationships, and decades of curation. Transferring its collections to a museum with a different history and context risks destroying that coherence. According to the former M HKA director, Herman De Bode—who resigned shortly after the government’s announcements—this transfer would threaten the museum’s expertise, even warning of a form of decapitation^[17] of M HKA’s long-term projects and skills.

As said previously, this announcement generated a reaction from different institutions like the Belgian International Committee for Museums and Collections of Modern Art, affiliated to ICOM (the International Council of Museums), which expressed its concerns that the transfer is the image of a false administrative logic^[18] that treats collections as mere accumulations of objects. A museum collection is a coherent body of artworks gathered according to their context, their artists, and their relationship to the place where they are displayed. As Belgian artist Luc Tuymans put it: “To degrade a museum to an arts centre is simply insane. You cannot simply take a collection of artworks and transplant it into another ecosystem, because such an ecosystem does not exist.”^[19]

The SMAK in Ghent does not have the capacity to exhibit M HKA’s entire collection.^[20] As a result, many works would be placed in storage, reducing their visibility and public access. Beyond that, it raises the question of the conservation of those artworks that will not be exposed, which, as a paradox, will demand more funding in terms of their conservation than letting them be exposed at the M HKA.

Legal Implications

The announcement proposing the transfer of M HKA’s collection raises multiple legal questions. An external legal analysis requested by artists and institutions concluded that the government’s approach violates fundamental principles of administrative law.^[21]

One major issue with this decision is that it was made without consulting the M HKA’s board, staff, artists, donors, or any experts or specialists.^[22] The government made this decision without consulting the interested parties, including the former M HKA Board President Herman De Bode, who resigned last October after this announcement.^[23]

De Bode has been vocal about this decision, knowing that the government had previously promised up to €130 million^[24] in funding for the new museum building, which has been postponed for the moment. Coming from a promise to extend the museum to an announcement to empty the museum of its collection did not make sense for him to keep his position, as he was projecting the museum’s vision in a completely different direction.

The museum has also expressed this lack of consultation in its following statement:

Such a project should normally serve as a starting point for an in-depth consultation with the sector concerned and is therefore not legally binding. However, it is being treated as if it were already an established policy, and previous decrees, management agreements, and decisions of the Flemish Government are being ignored or unilaterally revised, without due process or legal basis.^[25]

The M HKA argues these measures were adopted without due process, or consultation, in breach of general principles of good governance, including the right to be heard, fairness, and due care.^[26]

The report mentions also that the M HKA and the Flemish authorities have been working for a very long time on constructing a new building adjacent to the museum. This project was approved by the government back in 2016,^[27] supported by formal decisions and public announcements, allocated budgets, and expenses already incurred. Postponing this project affects the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations, fundamental European principles, applicable to all EU members. Those principles have been violated because, as noted earlier, the government did not provide an objective justification for the cancellation of this long-term project.

The legal analysis focused on the museum’s legal status and its regulation. The M HKA is recognized as a museum institution of the Flemish Community and a cultural heritage institution. This status is grounded in binding decrees, different decisions, and a Management Agreement valid until 31 December, 2025. These instruments cannot be overridden by a non-binding Concept Note issued on 3 October, 2025, as it is intended to be a consultation document.^[28] The document provided by the government presents major measures as faits accomplis (done deal,) including immediate termination of the new building project, M HKA’s change of status and mission, restructuring and reduction of operating subsidies, and proposed transfer of parts of the collection to SMAK, in Ghent.^[29] However, a Concept Note is a preparatory document meant to present its proposed reforms, which is generally used as a starting point for consultation and further legislative or regulatory steps. Therefore, the decision does not have any binding value at the moment, which was not presented this way when Caroline Gennez explained her intentions for the M HKA.

The report and the M HKA itself addressed their concern regarding artists’ moral rights, particularly the right of destination and integrity of works.^[30] Under those rights, some artworks are not transferable because they are intended for exhibition and conservation within the museum. Those conditions are laid out in accordance with agreements signed with artists and donors and in the context of acquisitions made by the museum. Several artists, including Anish Kapoor, Emilia Kabakov, and the estate of Christian Boltanski, have already demanded the removal of their works from the M HKA’s collection webpages and from those of all other Flemish museums.^[31]

Conclusion

In a press conference on 8 January 2026, the M HKA concluded that the Concept Note is being unlawfully implemented as binding policy, dismantling decades of approved cultural policy on the basis of a non-binding document.^[32] With the support of many institutions, the museum asks for consultation with the Minister and the Flemish Government.

About the Author:

Alexandra Kharchenko (Spring 2026 Intern, Center for Art law) is an LLM graduate of Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, Chicago. There, she was the LLM Representative of the Arts and Entertainment Law Society. Having passed the bar, she hopes to practice in the intellectual property or art law field.

Select References

1. Redazione, Controverse en Flandre : le gouvernement veut fermer le plus ancien musée d’art contemporain de Belgique, Finestre Sull’Arte, October 11, 2025, available at https://www.finestresullarte.info/fr/musees/controverse-en-flandre-le-gouvernement-veut-fermer-le-plus-ancien-musee-d-art-contemporain-de-belgique#google_vignette ↑
2. ​​Sanjay Sethi, Open Letter to the Flemish Ministry of Culture on the Future of the Museum of Contemporary Art Antwerp (M HKA), Artistic Freedom Initiative, December 8, 2025, available at https://artisticfreedominitiative.org/news/open-letter-to-the-flemish-ministry-of-culture-on-the-future-of-the-museum-of-contemporary-art-antwerp-m-hka/ ↑
3. Board of L’Internationale Confederation, Statement in support of M HKA, L’internationale, October 9, 2025, available at https://www.internationaleonline.org/contributions/statement-in-support-of-m-hka/ ↑
4. Hans Ulrich Obrist, Barbara Vanderlinden, Co-curators of Laboratorium (Antwerp, 1999) react with shock to Bruno Verbergt (Mu.ZEE) supporting M HKA’s dismantling, October 27 2025, available at https://museumatrisk.be/en/news/co-curators-of-laboratorium-1999-react-with-shock-to-bruno-verbergt-mu.zee-supporting-m-hkas-dismantling/ ↑
5. Jo Lawson-Tancred, Why Is Belgium Moving to Dismantle Its Oldest Contemporary Art Museum?, Artnet, January 9 2026, available at https://news.artnet.com/art-world/antwerp-contemporary-art-museum-controvery-2735239 ↑
6. Nicolas Gillard, Réforme des musées en Flandre : “Il y a des œuvres qui vont pourrir”, affirme un célèbre artiste flamand, RTBF, Ocotber 8, 2025 available at https://www.rtbf.be/article/reforme-des-musees-en-flandre-il-y-a-des-uvres-qui-vont-pourrir-affirme-un-celebre-artiste-flamand-11612384 ↑
7. Caroline Gennez, Betreft: Conceptnota hertekening landschap eigen museale instellingen envan de beeldende kunsten, Vlaanderen, October 3, 2025, available at https://themis.vlaanderen.be/files/17ce0d50-a06b-11f0-9b44-3797f8128cc9/download?name=VR%202025%200310%20MED.0374-1%20Conceptnota_hertekening%20landschap%20musea%20en%20beeldende%20kunsten%20-%20mededeling.pdf&content-disposition=inline ↑
8. Id. ↑
9. Id. ↑
10. Colin Clapson, ‘Belgium heading for the largest budget deficit in the Eurozone’, European Commission predicts, VRT NWS, November 17, 2025, available athttps://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2025/11/17/belgium-heading-for-the-largest-budget-deficit-in-the-eurozone/ ↑
11. Id. ↑
12. Philip Oltermann, Artists decry dismantling of Belgium’s oldest contemporary art museum, The Guardian, January 6, 2026, available at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/06/artists-decry-dismantling-antwerp-oldest-art-gallery ↑
13. Emilia Van Roy, Fermeture La Centrale for contemporary art : montrez votre support, Brussels Museum, December 9, 2025, available at https://www.brusselsmuseums.be/fr/actu-conseils/fermeture-la-centrale-for-contemporary-art-montrez-votre-support ↑
14. Id. supra note 5 ↑
15. Id. supra note 7 ↑
16. Id. supra note 7 ↑
17. Anne François, Belga, Le président du M HKA démissionne après la “décapitation” du musée anversois par le gouvernement flamand, VRT NWS, October 8, 2025, available at https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/fr/2025/10/06/la-flandre-reorganise-ses-musees-en-trois-poles-le-s-m-a-k-de/ ↑
18. Statement in support of M HKA, CIMAM, October 9, 2025, available at https://cimam.org/museum-watch/museum-watch-actions/in-support-of-m-hka/m-hka-caught-in-the-crosshairs-what-is-the-museums-future/, ↑
19. Id. supra note 8 ↑
20. Id. supra note 5 ↑
21. M HKA wijst op juridische tekortkomingen in projectplan hertekening Vlaams museaal landschap, M HKA, January 6, 2026, available at https://muhka.prezly.com/m-hka-wijst-op-juridische-tekortkomingen-in-projectplan-hertekening-vlaams-museaal-landschap ↑
22. Id. supra note 5 ↑
23. Id. supra note 6 ↑
24. News Desk, Flemish Government’s Plan to dissolve M HKA Sparks Outrage, ArtForum, October 13, 2025, available at https://www.artforum.com/news/flemish-governments-plan-dissolve-m-hka-sparks-outrage-1234736630/ ↑
25. Id. supra note 15 ↑
26. Id. supra note 21 ↑
27. Gilles Bechet, Le Muhka victime de la réorganisation des musées en Flandre, Le Journal des Arts, October 17, 2025, available at https://www.lejournaldesarts.fr/patrimoine/le-muhka-victime-de-la-reorganisation-des-musees-en-flandre-179879 ↑
28. Id. supra note 21 ↑
29. Id. supra note 21 ↑
30. Id. supra note 24 ↑
31. Jordan De Faÿ, Le M HKA dénonce le plan culturel du gouvernement flamand comme illégalLe Quotidien de l’Art, January 8, 2025, available at https://www.lequotidiendelart.com/articles/28456-le-m-hka-d%C3%A9nonce-le-plan-culturel-du-gouvernement-flamand-comme-ill%C3%A9gal.html ↑
32. Danny Ilegems, ‘Dit is onbehoorlijk bestuur, en bovendien volstrekt onwettig’: M HKA haalt zwaar juridisch geschut boven tegen museumplan Gennez, De Morgen, January 6, 2025, available at https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/dit-is-onbehoorlijk-bestuur-en-bovendien-volstrekt-onwettig-m-hka-haalt-zwaar-juridisch-geschut-boven-tegen-museumplan-gennez~b4f9b39c/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F ↑