Latest news

Download here the press release by Attorney Eline Tritsmans in your preferred language:

English      Dutch      French      Spanish      Italian

Time line

On 12 September 2018 at midnight an ‘Open Letter’ (in English and Dutch) was published online in the Belgian art magazine Rekto:Verso. In that letter, Jan Fabre, as artistic director of theatre/dance company Troubleyn, is accused of repeated bullying, sexual harassment, racism, sexism and abuse of power. The culture of Troubleyn is described as toxic and silencing. The letter was written in the name of “(ex)-collaborators of Troubleyn”, 8 signing by name and 12 signing anonymously.

The publication of the open letter was the kick-off event of a well-prepared media campaign. The letter was immediately spread to all media channels and on 13 September 2018 the so-called ‘#fabretoo’ was already front-page news in all Belgian newspapers and made headlines in the television news, immediately accompanied by statements of involved parties in the dance and cultural sector.

The next day on 14 September 2018 all Belgian newspapers simultaneously published a few anonymous witness statements of ex-performers of Troubleyn.

In the following days and weeks an important stream of press articles was published on the subject. The international media also followed, Jan Fabre was depicted as ‘sexual harrasser’ in, amongst others, the New York Times and Art Forum.
The campaign was prepared during months before the publication by ‘Engagement Arts’, a recently formed movement (2017) in the wake of #metoo, in collaboration with ACOD Cultuur (the labour union in the cultural sector) and the Belgian Institute for the equality of women and men.

In the months that followed the open letter was systematically used by Engagement Arts, ACOD Cultuur and others to sabotage Jan Fabre and Troubleyn in their artistic performances. Theatre directors worldwide were urged to cancel shows and/or communicate the open letter to the spectators. Action groups were formed to protest in front of theatres with banners (containing slogans from the open letter such as ‘no sex no solo’), spreading hostile leaflets, portraying Jan Fabre as a sexist, racist and sexual harasser. The image depicted in the open letter was taken for granted and continued to be widely spread and commented on in the press and on social media without fact-checking.
None of the authors of the open letter nor the above-mentioned organizations contacted Troubleyn or Jan Fabre before the publication of the open letter. They also dismissed any dialogue after the publication of the open letter.

Jan Fabre and Troubleyn answered in a serene manner and asked the ‘trial by media’ to stop and called on persons who claimed to be hurt to follow the available procedures.

No complaint was lodged, but Antwerp’s labour auditor started on its own initiative an investigation on the basis of the allegations in the open letter.

Jan Fabre and Troubleyn have given their collaboration to this investigation. Troubleyn also ordered an internal audit and took additional measures to safeguard the safety of the workspace which resulted in an elaborated ‘Integrity Policy’ that has been endorsed by Troubleyn and Jan Fabre and applied in their work environment since April 2019.

In January 2020, the investigation was closed and on 30 January 2020, the labour auditor decided that a ‘mediation and measures’ procedure with Jan FABRE would be appropriate for violations of the law on well-being at work with 4 former employees, 4 violations that would have been committed in the period from 1 April 2013 to 12 September 2018.

The civil parties broke off this mediation procedure in July 2020 by suddenly adding new statements to the criminal file. These new statements were from the same persons who had already signed by name the open letter in September 2018. In other words: it took almost two years after the publication of the open letter and the start of the investigation, before these persons added their written statement to the investigation.

On 29 March 2021, ‘the Statement by current and past performers and collaborators of Troubleyn and Jan Fabre’ was added to the criminal file. This joint statement signed by about 170 (former) performers and collaborators of Troubleyn refutes the contents of the open letter.

On 25 June 2021 Jan Fabre was summoned to appear before the court of first instance of Antwerp. The summons was made known to the media even before Jan Fabre had been able to take note of it.

On 25 March and 1 April 2022, the pleading sessions in the legal case against Jan Fabre took place. On those two days the lawyers for the complaining party and for the defending party were arguing the case.

On 29 April 2022, the court of first instance ruled. The judge imposed a suspended sentence of 18 months on Jan Fabre.

In total there were 11 civil parties and 1 injured party (a complainant that decided not constitute itself as a civil party) in the court case.

The court has not convicted Jan Fabre for the facts regarding 6 civil parties.

Fabre was condemned for violations on the law of well-being of workers regarding 6 ex-performers of Troubleyn (5 civil and one injured party), it concerns the following facts:
✔ A ‘French kiss’ exchanged with an ex-performer during a photo shoot. The judgment ruled that, in addition to a violation of law on well-being at work, this fact also constitutes the offense of ‘assault on the decency’. Fabre always maintained that the kiss was given in mutual consent, but the judges ruled otherwise.
✔ Regarding two ex-performers, a directive given by the artist during a rehearsal that, according to the judges, was sexually transgressive. It concerned the directive to a male performer that he should be able to describe the vaginas of the female performers in the ‘Tantalus Scene’ in Mount Olympus. In this scene the female performers were tempting the male performer with their vagina, a goal that was unreachable for him (the scene was based on the Tantalus Myth where it is impossible for Tantalus to drink the water that is at his feet or eat the fruit that is hanging above him while he is tied to a tree).
✔ Giving a nickname (Brazilian chocolate) and a comment to an ex-performer that she danced like ‘a headless chicken’ or was brainless. Fabre and other performers present explained that nicknames were given to all, both male and female, performers, that this practice was benign and to be gentle or witty, that nicknames were often based on country of origin (French lady, German giraffe…) and that comments were sometimes given in a direct manner to keep the performer focused and thinking (e.g. ‘headless chicken’ is a Flemish expression saying that you are not concentrated). The judges disregarded these arguments and said such comments were insulting and degrading, even if they were not intended as such.
✔ A pose that Fabre suggested during a professional photo shoot. This photo shoot was inspired on several works of grand masters (Rubens and others). Several male and female performers were photographed naked, in the presence of professional photographers and other assistants and had to take different poses. Jan Fabre is convicted because of one instruction that he would have given to this ex-performer, i.e. to turn around, spread her legs and place her head in between. The judges ruled that there was no evidence that this pose had any artistic value and even less so that this pose would have been inspired by the work of Rubens. The judges ruled that this pose was felt as humiliating and that Fabre should have known this.
✔ An attempt to approach an ex-performer during a photo shoot that took place in Fabre’s apartment. The judge ruled that Fabre put his hands on her breast and tried to kiss her, and that this was inappropriate even if, by her own saying, he immediately stopped when she asked him to. Although this ex-performer only wrote her declaration in a letter and was never interrogated during the investigation and although Fabre has always firmly denied the facts, the judges ruled the written declaration trustworthy.

Although the conviction is disappointing as Fabre had requested total acquittal, it is important to underline that the sentence was given with suspension, meaning that the judges ruled an effective punishment is not necessary.

Even more importantly, it is clear from the judgment that the negative caricatural image sketched of Jan Fabre as director/choreographer is not correct. The judgment explicitly states that Jan Fabre is not on trial for his character or his general style of leadership and rules out the hypothesis of a negative work environment. All of the outrageous accusations, including the existence of ‘toxic work environment’, ‘systematic abuse of power’ and the grotesque sloganesque accusation “no sex no solo” are invalidated by the judgment.
The judgment also refers to the 169 positive testimonies that were given to the court.

Even though the judgment at least brings the case back to more realistic proportions, it is worrying that magistrates are interfering with the judgment on what has artistic merit and what not, with direct impact on the decision of whether there is or not criminal conduct.

Jan Fabre, as well as the civil parties and the public prosecutor now have 1 month the time to study the details of the judgment and to decide if they go to the higher court of appeal or not.