Prosecutor: violence at Ajax-Maccabi Tel Aviv match not terrorism
Prosecutors have ruled out terrorism charges in connection with the violence surrounding last month’s Ajax-Maccabi Tel Aviv soccer match, despite identifying instances of antisemitism. Chief Prosecutor René de Beukelaer confirmed this during an interview with AT5’s Park Politiek program on Saturday. "From a legal standpoint, there was no terrorism involved," said De Beukelaer. "The suspects will not face terrorism charges, but in some cases, antisemitism has been formally included in the accusations."
The violence erupted during the match held in Amsterdam, prompting widespread condemnation and raising questions about motives behind the attacks.
The prosecutor's office has been investigating multiple incidents related to the match, analyzing messages shared in various app groups used to plan attacks. "There are app groups where many messages explicitly target Jews, Zionists, and Israelis—it’s all used interchangeably. Was it coordinated? That depends on how you define coordination," said De Beukelaer. "There was some group involvement, with individuals acting in smaller groups spread across the city."
Seven suspects are set to appear in court next Wednesday and Thursday. According to De Beukelaer, "Four of the seven suspects do not live in Amsterdam." The ongoing investigation suggests that many of those involved in the violence came from outside the city.
When asked about the backgrounds of the suspects, De Beukelaer declined to comment on whether they had a migration background, a topic that has stirred political debate. "The judiciary does not record such details because they are irrelevant to criminal proceedings," he said.
Although terrorism was ruled out, the prosecutor confirmed that antisemitism played a role in several cases. "Some individuals were actively involved in group-level insults, and this has been included in the charges," he said.
De Beukelaer explained the distinction between terrorism and the incidents at hand: "Terrorism legally requires intent to instill fear in a specific group. Here, fear among the Jewish community in Amsterdam was certainly a consequence of the violence, but there is no evidence to suggest it was the suspects' primary goal. The acts appear to have stemmed from anger, frustration, and grief over the situation in Israel and Gaza."
The prosecutor refrained from speculating on the exact sentences to be sought but confirmed that prison terms are likely. "You should think of unconditional imprisonment," he said, without elaborating further on the potential length of sentences.
De Beukelaer criticized the way some demonstrators handled the aftermath of the violence. He referred specifically to pro-Palestinian demonstrators who challenged Amsterdam’s demonstration ban in court. After the court upheld the ban, some chose to protest anyway. "That is deeply concerning. When the court rules against you, and you proceed regardless, it undermines the rule of law," he said.
De Beukelaer expressed broader concerns about the erosion of respect for the law, noting that he had been repeatedly asked whether laws should be ignored during times of crisis. "For me, the answer is clear: as chief prosecutor, my priority is to uphold the law, even during crises."
The decision to relocate an anti-antisemitism rally from Dam Square to the Stopera area also drew public criticism. Critics pointed out that a pro-Palestinian demonstration was similarly relocated two days later. De Beukelaer expressed frustration over the lack of support for the decisions made. "I think there is still room for more recognition from The Hague for what we are trying to accomplish here in Amsterdam," he said.
