In an important case on the right to demonstrate, the State Council upheld the appeal.
The case involved a 2017 announced demonstration in The Hague by citizens who wanted to organize a short symbolic hunger strike in front of the Moroccan embassy. This in solidarity with Moroccan human rights activists.
The organizers of the action received an email message from the police informing them that the mayor could not allow the form, place and time of the demonstration. Among other things, it was indicated that a hunger strike could be perceived as shocking by bystanders. Therefore, the demonstration was not allowed to proceed as planned.
The organizers decided to cancel the demonstration and appealed the demonstration ban. They invoked their right to demonstrate in front of the embassy, choosing the form of the demonstration. The mayor of The Hague refused to consider the objection to the demonstration ban because the mayor felt that the police email would not be a decision. About that, one of the organizers litigated first in court and then in the Council of State.
The court and the State Council weighed in on whether the police email was sent on behalf of the mayor and whether the email was a prohibition against demonstrating or, as the municipality argued, an invitation to consult.
The court rejected the appeal.
The court’s ruling was appealed. Because allowing mayors to ban demonstrations (through the police) by e-mail without the possibility of objection is not only a curtailment of the right to demonstrate but also a restriction of access to justice.
The State Council, in its ruling of Oct. 9, 2019, fortunately overturned the court’s ruling and thus the views of the municipality (read the ruling here).
According to the Council of State, the e-mail from the police showed: “concretely and unambiguously that the mayor has decided that the demonstration could not take place in the manner desired by the organization. The e-mail is thus aimed at legal effect, namely prohibiting the reported demonstration.”
This means that mayors cannot simply prohibit demonstrations (via the police) by e-mail, without the possibility of objection by demonstrators.
All parties involved are very pleased with this beautiful and clear ruling by the Council of State.
Now that the Council of State has deemed the e-mail to be a decision, the demonstration organizers can move on to the substance of the objection: on whether the mayor was allowed to ban the demonstration. PILP views this procedure with confidence.
The organizers of the demonstration were supported and assisted in this lawsuit by PILP and by attorney Alexander IJkelenstam of law firm CMS (through Pro Bono Connect).