Linking Muslims and people with “foreign sounding names” to terrorism without any objective reason contributes to prejudice and sustains a recurring stigma. Being questioned in the context of the WWFT merely due to the mention of a name as common as ‘Mohamed’ is stigmatising.
Three individual clients of ING Bank who have experienced unwarranted allegations of terrorism related financial traffic on solely on the basis a connection to a “foreign sounding name”, have filed complaint cases before the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights (College voor de Rechten van de Mens). These clients are supported by officers from Discriminatie.nl and by lawyers from PILP.
It is not disputed that banks are obliged to screen transactions, or that the Dutch Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Prevention) Act (Wwft) and sanctions legislation must be strictly complied with. However, ING has a great deal of freedom in relation to how it performs this task. ING has freely chosen a specific approach, using a specific algorithm and deploying human resources in a specific way. The manner in which ING chooses to perform its verification task is drawing an unjustifiable distinction between people. Selecting people solely on the basis of connection to a name that is somewhat (not even a perfect match) simalar to a name on an international sanctions list is not only stigmatizing, it is also negligent. In other words, this practice is a clear form of discrimination.
The National Institute on Human Rigths (NIHR) ruled on 25 July 2024 that ING discriminated in checks for terrorist financing. The bank wrongfully froze customers’ accounts and asked them extra questions about transactions solely because of their surname or the inclusion of a so-called “non-Dutch-sounding” name in the description. This particularly greatly affected people of non-Dutch origin, it said. The bank also handled customer discrimination complaints negligently.
In a groundbreaking judgment, the NIHR states that in the case of two customers, the ING wrongfully discriminated on the basis of race by selecting them solely on the basis of their last name or mentioning a “non-Dutch” name in the description of a transaction. This is discrimination and therefore prohibited, the NIHR rules. The third case is still pending.