In February 2024, our clients sent a letter to the cabinet urging them to formally declare in writing that ethnic profiling is prohibited and to enforce this ban across all government organizations. This call comes a year after the Court of Appeal in The Hague affirmed that ethnic profiling constitutes discrimination and is therefore illegal.
Groundbreaking Ruling February 2023
Today marks exactly one year since the Court, in a groundbreaking decision, ruled that the Royal Marechaussee (KMar) must cease ethnic profiling. The Court determined that using ethnicity as a criterion for selecting individuals for inspection constitutes a form of discrimination. This legal victory was a necessary step in the years-long struggle against ethnic profiling. Unfortunately, despite the ruling, ethnic profiling has not been completely eradicated in the Netherlands.
Details of the Legal Case
During border controls, travelers were selected for inspections by the KMar based on their appearance, skin color, or origin (ethnicity). Additionally, the KMar utilized specific ‘risk profiles’ linked to ethnicity, such as men who walk quickly, are well-dressed, and appear “non-Dutch.” Despite criticism, the government maintained that ethnicity, combined with other characteristics, could be part of risk profiles. Subsequently, a coalition consisting of Amnesty International, Controle Alt Delete, Anti-Discrimination Bureau RADAR, Dutch Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, and two ‘non-white’ citizens who were repeatedly ethnically profiled initiated a civil procedure against the State. This coalition was supported by lawyers from PILP and Houthoff.
After an initial unfavorable ruling by the lower court, the Court of Appeal declared last year that ethnic profiling is discrimination. In other words, ethnic profiling violates human rights and Dutch law. This ruling is final, as the State decided not to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Developments Since the Ruling
Regrettably, according to our clients, there has been insufficient change in practice. In response to the ruling, the government initially stated that it did not apply to car and train controls and was not relevant to other government organizations, which we believe is an incorrect interpretation. Furthermore, ethnic profiling by the KMar continues to occur in practice, and other government agencies appear to persist in engaging in ethnic profiling.
PILP’s Actions
Strategic litigation is effective only when combined with other means of change, such as campaigning and lobbying. Therefore, PILP’s involvement in a case does not end when the legal proceedings conclude. PILP collaborates with stakeholders to ensure the implementation of the Court’s ruling. Additionally, PILP provides legal analysis of the government’s response to the ruling, offers legal advice, and considers potential new legal actions.
Read more about this case here.