Netherlands working on new law to allow women to check partner’s police record
The Dutch cabinet plans to introduce legislation next year that would allow women to ask police whether their current or former partner has a history of violence, a proposed Dutch version of Clare’s Law aimed at preventing domestic abuse and femicide.
Despite the proposal, parliamentarians said this week they are surprised by the Cabinet’s overall slow movement in tackling domestic violence.
Justice and Security Minister David van Weel (VVD) outlined the plan in a letter to the Tweede Kamer, RTL reports. The government emphasized that the proposal is not a stand-alone solution, but rather a component of a comprehensive strategy to mitigate domestic violence.
The initiative is based on the United Kingdom’s Clare’s Law, named after Clare Wood, who was murdered in 2009 by her ex-partner. Police in that case were aware of his prior violent behavior, but Wood did not have access to that information. In England and Wales, since 2014, individuals have been able to request information from police about a partner’s domestic violence history. In some cases, family members or friends may also request it.
The Dutch cabinet says a similar system could help prevent serious harm, but only if strong safeguards are in place. Research cited by the government shows that such a system works only when clear rules are in place, alongside sufficient service capacity, effective victim support, and coordinated information sharing between agencies.
The scale of the problem is significant. According to the 2024 Prevalence Monitor on Domestic Violence and Sexual Transgressive Behavior, 9 percent of people aged 16 and older in the Netherlands reported being victims of domestic violence in the past year, representing nearly 1.3 million individuals.
In the meantime, on Wednesday in the Tweede Kamer, nearly all parties questioned why authorities continue to miss or mishandle signs of abuse against women and children, despite years of warnings and prior debates on the issue. The discussion was fueled in part by last year’s severe abuse case involving a foster girl in Vlaardingen and recent concerns about missed warning signals involving two children in Stadskanaal.
Ingrid Coenradie from JA21 voiced frustration over the lack of progress. “I have had enough,” demanding immediate action from the government. Coenradie proposed that any signal involving a child should automatically trigger a pedagogical inspection within 48 hours, even at the smallest indication of concern.
“How is it possible that we are asking the same questions again as last year?” said Lisa Westerveld from GroenLinks-PvdA (PRO), referring to the earlier Vlaardingen foster care case, where the child ended up in a coma after severe abuse by foster parents.
Minister Mirjam Sterk, responsible for care policy within the CDA government framework, responded by outlining ongoing action plans and initiatives still in development. She emphasized that addressing the problem requires structural and cultural change within institutions. “Organizations must start speaking the same language,” she said.
Sterk also pushed back against criticism that little is being done. “I get the impression that Parliament sometimes wants to apply bandages, but it is about a system that is failing and must be changed,” she said. “I do not recognize that nothing is happening, but I do recognize that it is an extremely complex problem. It must be solved, and I want to commit myself strongly to that.”
Bente Becker from the VVD urged the minister to move beyond plans and take concrete steps. “As Parliament, we have been hearing this for four years,” she said.
There was broad agreement among the nine parties present that it is unacceptable that similar debates keep recurring while children remain unprotected. Lawmakers, including Becker and Marijke Synhaeve of D66, said bureaucracy must never stand in the way of timely intervention when abuse is suspected.
There was also broad support across parties for stronger measures against perpetrators. Several lawmakers argued that, when abuse occurs, “make sure the perpetrator has to leave the home, not the victims,” emphasizing a shift in protection priorities.
