Ombudsman calls for reassessment of protest rights in the Netherlands
Dutch National Ombudsman Reinier van Zutphen is launching a new investigation into the state of protest rights in the Netherlands, citing growing concerns over the restrictions placed on demonstrations. His move comes seven years after his initial inquiry into the issue.
Demonstrations in Amsterdam last week were forced to relocate twice, primarily due to disruptions caused to shoppers. Van Zutphen expressed his worry that it is becoming increasingly difficult for individuals to freely express their opinions in the country.
“It is concerning when people can no longer express their views. If politicians claim the right to say what they want, I would like them to acknowledge that others have the same right,” Van Zutphen said.
In November, following violent clashes during the Maccabi protests, a one-week ban on demonstrations was imposed in Amsterdam. Van Zutphen questioned the severity of such actions, calling it “borderline” and expressing concerns over the broader impact on the right to protest.
“There were some horrific events in the city, and the government had to address it. But I wondered if a week-long ban was justified. Could this be a step too far? It’s a drastic measure. We can’t keep prohibiting and relocating protests. That limits the right to demonstrate,” he added.
Seven years ago, Van Zutphen’s earlier report concluded that the right to protest in the Netherlands was not adequately safeguarded. The investigation at the time questioned whether the government used appropriate reasoning to restrict or prohibit protests.
“When the government limits or prohibits protests, they must provide strong justifications, such as public safety concerns or traffic disruptions. Many complaints arose from organizations claiming their human rights were being infringed upon. The law clearly states that citizens can protest unless there’s a legitimate concern about public health, order, or traffic flow,” Van Zutphen noted.
The 2024 investigation will delve into whether these restrictions have intensified. Van Zutphen acknowledged that protests should not be a free-for-all but emphasized that they should not devolve into violence or result in unlawful conduct.
“There has been an increase in destructive actions that go beyond free speech. At the same time, there are instances of police violence. People are being detained before protests even begin or dropped off in isolated areas with no support. It’s become more chaotic and disrespectful. We used to be able to have civil conversations when complaints arose. Now, it’s unclear who is demonstrating and where the line is between protest and violence,” he explained.
The ombudsman also responded to recent calls from the government for more restrictions on protest rights, particularly following the Maccabi riots.
“There is a law based on the European Convention on Human Rights that guarantees the right to protest. We’ve signed that agreement. I believe lawmakers can’t simply abandon such commitments,” he said.
Van Zutphen added that politicians pushing for these changes seem to have forgotten the core values of Dutch society. “It’s time to reconsider why we have the right to protest and what it means to take that right away from others,” he stated.
Though some argue that there are simply too many protests, with over 3,000 held this year alone, Van Zutphen rejected this reasoning. “Are there too many protests? That’s what the police say. But just because there are numerous protests doesn’t mean the right to demonstrate should be taken away. We need to prioritize, but we can’t allow the lack of resources to limit fundamental freedoms,” he said.
Van Zutphen suggested that other public safety concerns, like crime, shouldn’t be used as an excuse to limit protests. “Just because police have other responsibilities doesn’t mean they can restrict the right to express opinions. If we allowed that reasoning, you could just as easily ban a football match. Fundamental rights should always come first,” he added.
