belgiumpulse
Search
Image illustrating: A Tesla on a Flemish public road with road markings and traffic signs visible (editorial)
Photo by Annaëlle Quionquion on Pexels
← Flanders
Flemish Mobility

What does Flanders’ green light for self-driving Teslas mean on the public road?

Flemish Minister of Mobility, Public Works, Ports and Sport Annick De Ridder has approved the use of self-driving Tesla functions on public roads in Flanders, according to VRT NWS and De Morgen. The decision puts Vlaanderen into the next phase of a European debate that is no longer about whether automated driving can be tested, but under what legal, safety and consumer-information conditions it may enter ordinary traffic. For drivers, the key point is practical: this is not a licence to stop paying attention. Tesla’s system is presented in Europe as supervised driver assistance, meaning the person behind the wheel remains part of the safety chain unless and until a vehicle is formally authorised as automated or fully automated under the applicable EU and Belgian rules. The competence picture is split. Flanders manages regional roads and mobility policy, and can decide how approved systems are allowed onto the Vlaamse openbare weg. The federal level remains relevant for the Highway Code, vehicle registration, insurance and enforcement architecture. The EU sets the technical type-approval framework for automated and fully automated vehicles, including the distinction between systems that still expect driver intervention and those designed to operate without driver supervision.

Belgium Impulse Editorial·29 June 2026·3 min read·6 sources
Key signal

This matters because the decision moves automated driving from specialist trials toward everyday traffic management in Flanders. Tesla owners may see new functions become usable on Flemish roads, but other road users will share the same space with cars making more steering, braking and route decisions through software. The practical question for residents is not only whether the technology works in ideal conditions. It is how it behaves around cyclists, tram tracks, roadworks, school zones, roundabouts and dense urban streets, all of which are common in Flanders. For policymakers, it is a test of whether Belgium’s divided mobility powers can handle a technology that crosses regional, federal and EU boundaries in one journey.

The subject is the Flemish authorisation of self-driving Tesla functions on public roads. The named political actor is Annick De Ridder, N-VA, Flemish Minister of Mobility, Public Works, Ports and Sport in the Diependaele government, which began after the 9 June 2024 regional elections. The technology at issue should be treated carefully: in public language it is often called self-driving, but EU law distinguishes between an automated vehicle, where driver intervention is still expected or required, and a fully automated vehicle, which is designed to move without any driver supervision. That distinction matters for liability, police enforcement, insurance and what drivers may actually do behind the wheel.

Background

Belgium’s road policy is institutionally layered. Successive state reforms gave the regions major powers over roads, mobility planning and road safety policy, while core traffic rules and vehicle-law questions have remained partly federal. That structure worked reasonably well for speed limits, infrastructure and enforcement priorities, but automated driving exposes its complexity. A car does not know constitutional boundaries in the way administrations do. Since 2022, EU vehicle safety legislation has added a further layer by creating common type-approval concepts for automated and fully automated vehicles. Flanders’ decision therefore sits inside a broader European shift: road authorities are moving from pilot projects to controlled public-road deployment.

OIS Intelligence

Impact

Regional — The impact is strongest in Flanders because the reported approval concerns the Vlaamse openbare weg. Drivers crossing into Brussels or Wallonia should not assume identical rules or enforcement practice unless the relevant authorities make the same decision or a harmonised Belgian approach follows.

Opposing perspectives

  1. Flemish government innovation-and-control frame

    The De Ridder line is likely to present the approval as a controlled opening for new mobility technology rather than a free-for-all. In this frame, Vlaanderen should not wait passively while automated-driving systems develop elsewhere, but should allow deployment under conditions that fit Flemish roads and public safety responsibilities.

  2. Road-safety and consumer-protection frame

    Road-safety organisations, insurers and consumer groups are likely to focus on the gap between the phrase self-driving and the driver’s continuing duty to supervise. Their concern is not only crash risk, but also whether users understand the limits of the system in rain, roadworks, mixed cycling traffic and complex junctions.

  3. Federal-regional competence frame

    Federal mobility authorities, police and insurers have a separate interest in clarity. Even if Flanders controls access to regional public roads, the Highway Code, vehicle registration, liability and enforcement systems cannot be treated as purely Flemish matters when a car crosses a regional border.

  4. Tesla-owner and technology-adoption frame

    Tesla owners and pro-innovation groups are likely to welcome the decision as long-awaited access to functions already discussed elsewhere in Europe. Their argument is that supervised automation can reduce fatigue and improve consistency, provided the rules are clear and the software is not treated as a substitute for legal driver responsibility.

Sources & evidence