Kolna Falasteen Hearing on the Right to Protest

Bekijk alles
September 9, 2026
News items
 
Next

Today, September 8, 2026, a court hearing was held at the Amsterdam District Court regarding Kolna Falasteen’s right to demonstrate. The hearing concerned restrictions that the mayor of Amsterdam had imposed on Kolna Falasteen’s demonstrations. For example, the demonstrators were required to demonstrate on Beursplein, and a noise limit of a maximum number of decibels was imposed. Kolna Falasteen is represented by attorneys from the PILP Foundation.

What led up to this?

Kolna Falasteen is a grassroots movement led by Dutch Palestinians from Gaza. This movement advocates for and draws attention to the Palestinian cause. To this end, its members organize, among other things, evening demonstrations and protest marches.

On August 1, 2024, the mayor of Amsterdam issued a decision prohibiting the group from demonstrating on Dam Square. Instead, demonstrations were only permitted as static gatherings on Beursplein. Kolna Falasteen did not want to gather on Beursplein for various reasons, and they found the restriction that they were not allowed to demonstrate anywhere else in the city to be highly limiting. Protesters were also limited to playing music for a maximum of 10 minutes per hour, and artificial sound sources, such as megaphones, were not allowed to produce sound louder than 100 decibels.

After PILP filed an objection to this decision on behalf of its client, the mayor rescinded the music regulation. This was because the clients played exclusively Palestinian music during the demonstrations. Restricting this constitutes an interference with the content of the demonstration, which is prohibited under (inter)national law. However, the mayor upheld the location requirement and the noise level restriction. During the hearing, the legality of these restrictions was debated.

The restrictions violate the freedom of assembly

Mayors may impose restrictions on a protest, but only if those restrictions are based on the law and consistent with human rights. The restrictions must be necessary and proportionate.

According to clients, the restrictions imposed do not meet these criteria. Furthermore, a fundamental principle of the right to protest is that a certain degree of disruption and inconvenience caused by a protest must be tolerated. Another principle is that the wishes of the protesters must take precedence. According to Kolna Falasteen, this is inconsistent with imposing a mandatory location for demonstrations.

The ruling is expected in twelve weeks

 
Next
Actueel

Gerelateerde berichten

July 9, 2026 Right to protest

Complaint Filed with the National Ombudsman Regarding Advanced Camera Surveillance at a Peaceful Protest

On 5 October 2025, the third Red Line demonstration took place in Amsterdam. The demonstrators called on the Dutch government to take action against Israel to stop the genocide in Gaza. It The protest was peaceful, with participants exercising their constitutional right to freedom of assembly and demonstration. There was no violence, vandalism, or disorder […]

climate climate change
May 28, 2026 Climate change

Two climate activists from Heerlen take their case to the UN Human Rights Committee over restrictions on peaceful protest

Today, two climate activists from Heerlen have launched a case against the Netherlands at the UN Human Rights Committee. The case concerns restrictions imposed by the municipality of Heerlen in March 2021 on a peaceful demonstration against the climate crisis. Following the Dutch court’s decision to uphold a number of significant restrictions, the organisers of […]

Islamophobia Mosque
February 11, 2026 Islamophobia en surveillance

Dutch Data Protection Authority Fines 10 Municipalities for Illegally Processing Information on Muslims

The Dutch Data Protection Authority (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens, AP) has imposed fines totaling €250,000 on ten municipalities. The reason is that they processed files containing sensitive information about Islamic residents without the residents’ knowledge. In doing so, the municipalities violated the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). They were not authorized to possess this information. The municipalities […]

1 2 3 36 37 38
Gerelateerde berichten

Our Dossiers

Our Dossiers

Support our work

PILP is the legal ally of civil society organizations, movements, communities, and activists dedicated to human rights. Your donation enables us to continue providing this service.