Number of flights at Schiphol should not be reduced without EU approval

The Dutch government should not limit the number of flights at Schiphol without the approval of the European Union. This is the result of a statement to the Supreme Court. In July, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal still gave the "green light" to the government's plans to combat noise pollution at Schiphol, but according to the Attorney General, this decision cannot be upheld.

The Supreme Court is still considering a ruling in the case. The Attorney General is an important advisor to the Dutch Supreme Court. His opinions are often accepted, but not necessarily.

Back in November, the Cabinet temporarily suspended the plan to limit the number of flights at Schiphol to 460,000 in the summer. Outgoing Minister Mark Harbers (Infrastructure) maintains that Schiphol must eventually shrink in order to protect nature, the climate and the habitat. However, the plan to start this as early as 2024 has faced too many legal objections.

The Attorney General's opinion is still very important for the airlines. They had turned to the Supreme Court in the summer because the court's conclusions would create "ambiguity and thus uncertainty for travelers and the industry".

The US Department of Transportation already announced last year that it considered the imposed shrinkage, which would also hit US airlines hard, to be a violation of international agreements. This also threatened KLM's landing rights at airports in the United States.

This was later followed by a letter in which EU Transport Commissioner Adina Vălean expressed concerns about the first step of the shrinkage plan. It violated European law, as there had been no proper consultation with the aviation industry.

The Attorney General also referred to Brussels. According to him, the state should have complied with all types of conditions under European law. The court stated in July that it was a temporary measure that the state could introduce in this way without the European regulations being relevant. The Attorney General, however, disagrees with the latter. According to him, a temporary measure would not fall under an exception at all.

KLM responded that it agreed with the Advocate General's words. The airline said a cleaner and quieter Schiphol can be achieved without reducing flights. "We are now waiting for the Supreme Court's ruling on this matter," said KLM.