Amnesty International Netherlands carried out pre-litigation research preparing for litigation to challenge the unlawful and unregulated online monitoring by police and/or municipalities in the Netherlands.
The research was completed in June 2024 and included desk research on online
monitoring practices and applicable human rights standards, as well as strategic advice from two law firms on the best litigation strategy to stop online monitoring by Dutch public authorities. They were able to identify a number of appropriate legal targets and routes, and established that a litigation case against municipalities has a higher chance of success but that a case against the police will have a greater impact. Amnesty identified two possible cases that may lend themselves for a litigation procedure on online monitoring by the police, one related to climate justice protests and one related to the right to housing movement.
As for the case related to climate justice protests, a lawsuit on house visits has been brought forward against the police. As part of this case, the impact of online surveillance has been highlighted, both in court as well as with oversight bodies, since online surveillance was often identified as the trigger of house visits. This lawsuit was successful; the Dutch police adjusted their policy on house visits and the Dutch Data Protection Authority (AP) expressed its criticism.
Unlawful and unregulated surveillance by public authorities in the Netherlands
Organisation Name
Amnesty International Netherlands
Country/Jurisdiction
The Netherlands
Amount Granted
EUR 39,983
Current Status
Research complete
Image credit: Colin Foo
Grant type
Pre-litigation Research Support
Description
Amnesty International Netherlands carried out pre-litigation research preparing for litigation to challenge the unlawful and unregulated online monitoring by police and/or municipalities in the Netherlands.
The research was completed in June 2024 and included desk research on online monitoring practices and applicable human rights standards, as well as strategic advice from two law firms on the best litigation strategy to stop online monitoring by Dutch public authorities. They were able to identify a number of appropriate legal targets and routes, and established that a litigation case against municipalities has a higher chance of success but that a case against the police will have a greater impact. Amnesty identified two possible cases that may lend themselves for a litigation procedure on online monitoring by the police, one related to climate justice protests and one related to the right to housing movement.
As for the case related to climate justice protests, a lawsuit on house visits has been brought forward against the police. As part of this case, the impact of online surveillance has been highlighted, both in court as well as with oversight bodies, since online surveillance was often identified as the trigger of house visits. This lawsuit was successful; the Dutch police adjusted their policy on house visits and the Dutch Data Protection Authority (AP) expressed its criticism.
In terms of the case related to the right to housing movement, Amnesty has regularly met with activists and lawyers to support them with data access requests and Freedom of Information requests. This process brought to light information about surveillance practices at universities and helped to better understand how different surveillance tactics are interconnected. Amnesty subsequently raised these issues in the media.
Amnesty used this information for various forms of policy advocacy, including their lobby against proposed legislation on online surveillance. This included contributions to public consultations, meetings with ministries, discussions with supervisory authorities, and engagements with journalists.
"Amnesty identified two possible cases that may lend themselves for a litigation procedure on online monitoring by the police, one related to climate justice protests and one related to the right to housing movement"
Strategic Goal
The broader objective was to stop mass surveillance by governments. Related to this, Amnesty International Netherlands hopes:
- People in the Netherlands are effectively protected against unlawful online monitoring by municipalities and police (and ideally also other public authorities).
- Public authorities in the Netherlands are held accountable for multiple human rights harms resulting from unlawful online monitoring, including the right to privacy and data protection, the rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association, and the right to non-discrimination.
Other media and related links