Overview of the main changes since the previous report update

Author

Dutch Council for Refugees Visit Website

The report was previously updated in May 2023.

International protection

Asylum procedure

• Key asylum statistics: In 2023, a total of 49,892 asylum applications were lodged in the Netherlands (including repeated applications and family reunification). 38,377 first applications for international protection were lodged, mainly by Syrian (13,028), Turkish (2,862) and Eritrean (2,345) nationals. The number of first asylum applications increased slightly from 35,535 in 2022. 1,390 repeated asylum applications were lodged in 2023, a decrease from 1,529 in 2022.^[1] 17,490 decisions on first asylum requests were taken during 2023.

The overall recognition rate at first instance stood at 80.2%: 18.35% refugee status, 58.38% subsidiary protection, and 4.1% humanitarian protection (see Statistics).

• Growing backlog and ‘pilots’: The backlog of asylum cases continues to grow. The IND does not have the capacity to handle all the incoming asylum requests and tries to implement experimental procedural changes to increase the speed of the decision-making process and efficiency of the available personnel. Due to these ‘pilots’, problems arise with some nationalities receiving their decisions much faster, and more complicated asylum requests being decided upon after years of waiting. As a result of these pilots, the asylum procedure has become more chaotic and has resulted in less predictable interview and decision dates (see Regular Procedure – Personal interview).
• Extension of the time limit to issue an asylum decision: The third extension of the time limit to issue an asylum decision was announced on 19 December 2023. This means that the IND can take 15 months instead of the normal 6 months to decide on asylum requests. Whether this extension is in accordance with the Asylum Procedures Directive is still uncertain, as preliminary questions have been referred to the CJEU, but until the Court’s judgment the extension of the time limit is upheld as the IND struggles to clear the backlog of cases and increase its own capacity (see The rest and preparation period).
• Provisional measures in Dublin cases: In the case of E.N., S.S. and J.Y. v. The Netherlands the CJEU considered that the State Secretary can only request suspensive effect of the transfer deadline in the onward appeal stage if the first appeal had suspensive effect. In practice, this means that the State Secretary (and the asylum seeker) can only request to suspend the transfer deadline in Dublin cases when presenting an appeal against a judgment of the Council of State if the first instance court had granted suspensive effect per request of the asylum seeker.

Following this judgment, the IND changed their policy regarding suspensive effect of a provisional ruling. The State Secretary argued that the mere request of a provisional ruling amounted to suspensive effect as laid down in Article 27(3) Dublin Regulation, meaning that this resulted in the suspension of the transfer period (Article 29(1) Dublin Regulation). Before, only an allocated provisional measure would result in the suspension of the transfer decision. On 22 November 2023, the Council of State ruled that this policy was not in accordance with the Dublin Regulation, and that a judge’s decision regarding the request for a provisional ruling decided if it had suspensive effect, and not the mere request. As a result, the policy change was reverted to the situation as it was before (see Dublin procedure – Procedure).

• Suspension of Dublin transfers to Italy: On 5 December 2022, the Italian authorities issued a Circular Letter asking other member states’ Dublin Units to temporarily halt all Dublin transfers to Italy due to a lack of reception facilities for Dublin returnees. Some Regional Courts concluded that this Circular Letter was indeed of temporary nature, whereas other Regional Courts found that the Letter was proof of the structural issues within Italian reception’s system and conditions. On 26 April 2023, the Council of State judged that there was no more mutual trust with regards to Italy. The main reason for the suspension is the lack of accommodation facilities in Italy, where a transfer to that country could mean that an asylum seeker finds themself in a situation of severe material deprivation as outlined in the ECJ judgment Following this decision, all Dublin transfers to Italy were suspended and have yet to resume (see Dublin – Suspension of transfers).
• Suspension of certain Dublin transfers to Belgium: On 20 February 2023, the Regional Court of Rotterdam ruled that it is unclear whether the applicant will have access to reception facilities upon returning to Belgium. It concluded that the applicant provided concrete indications of his risk of being treated contrary to Article 3 ECHR or Article 4 EU Charter if returned to Belgium. Following this judgment, multiple other Regional Courts decided likewise with regards to single men. For families, women and vulnerable people, the principle of mutual trust is still applicable as they receive priority with regards to accommodation. Single men were placed on a waiting list, meaning they had to wait for several months. Appeals from men have therefore generally been successful, whereas women, families and vulnerable people can be transferred to Belgium. Until then appeals against transfers of single men to Belgium were all expected to be successful. On 13 March 2024, the Council of State ruled that transfers for single men can also continue. It found that even though there are significant problems with the Belgian reception facilities, since asylum seekers can find shelter at locations such as homeless shelters, the situation can not be said to reach the threshold of the situation of severe material deprivation as outlined in the CJEU judgment Jawo[2] (see Dublin – Suspension of transfers).
• Pushback practices in Bulgaria, Croatia, Poland and Romania: Both the Regional Courts and the Council of State issued many judgments during 2023 regarding the principle of mutual trust and pushbacks vis-à-vis Bulgaria, Croatia, Poland and Romania, and to a lesser degree Slovenia. The presence of pushbacks is mostly undisputed, but because these illegal activities occur on the outer borders of these countries and do not concern Dublin returnees, Dublin transfers are not suspended. Only if Dublin returnees can be victims of pushbacks, is there a possibility of suspension of Dublin transfers. In this regard the preliminary questions regarding the principle of mutual trust put to the European Court of Justice are highly important, as the answers to those questions might shift the policies with regards to these countries if the Court finds that human rights’ infringements at the borders can detract from the principle of mutual trust (see Dublin – Suspension of transfers).
• Beneficiaries of international protection from Greece: As all other asylum seekers, beneficiaries of international protection in Greece wait 15 months for their asylum application to be processed. The IND decided on their applications as if they were first-time applicants. On 30 August 2023, following preliminary questions to the CJEU from Germany,^[3] the Council of State sent to the CJEU additional preliminary questions on how to deal with an asylum application of a TCN who has already been granted international protection in Greece but faces inhuman conditions in Greece^[4] (see First country of asylum – EU Member States).

Reception conditions

• Reception conditions: Half of the people entitled to reception conditions, i.e. asylum seekers, as well as beneficiaries of international protection who have not been offered housing yet, were staying in (crisis) emergency centres over the course of 2023 (32,667 out of 64,405 people). Different reports highlight how that the majority of the (crisis) emergency locations still largely fail to meet the State’s obligations under European law.^[5] While some (crisis) emergency locations have adequate facilities, these are exceptions, and conditions elsewhere are equally distressing, if not worse than last year. Additionally, the (social) safety and self-sufficiency of residents in (crisis) emergency locations need improvement. This can make a significant difference in how residents experience their stay. Without structural measures, the dire situation in which residents find themselves at the (crisis) emergency locations continues to be without a foreseeable resolution. The Dutch government thereby violates its obligation to provide adequate and humane accommodation for asylum seekers in the Netherlands. Moreover, people suffer severely from a lack of privacy, tranquillity, and suitable nutrition. Sanitary facilities are inadequate and particularly unhygienic in too many places. Problems with healthcare accessibility exist in almost half of the (crisis) shelters. Additionally, the majority of the (crisis) shelters are detrimental to children, who experience a decline in health and weight loss due to a lack of activities, safe play areas, and healthy food. Finally, residents at three-quarters of the (crisis) emergency locations indicate that the living conditions affect their well-being and sense of human dignity. Large differences between (crisis) shelters also reveal that whether asylum seekers are able to experience decent reception in the Netherlands is subject to arbitrariness (see Reception conditions).
• Ter Apel: In 2023, no asylum seekers had to sleep out in the open in Ter Apel. However, over the course of 2023 there were many moments in which Ter Apel reached its capacity and urgent measures needed to be taken. In a letter of 24 May 2023, the State Secretary announced that it needed to open two locations for unregistered asylum seekers again.^[6] In a letter of 6 June 2023 it was announced that three or four of these locations were needed.^[7] On 1 July 2023, the first of these locations opened in Assen with a capacity of 500 beds.^[8] Unfortunately, in late 2023, distressing circumstances occurred again. Because there was no longer space in the facility itself, starting from 9^th October 2023, the waiting area of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND) was used to accommodate asylum seekers.^[9] The waiting area did not have beds or showers. Initially, it only affected asylum seekers who reported to Ter Apel in the evening or at night, but it rapidly also included those who reported during the day, and asylum seekers (including children) sometimes had to stay there for multiple nights. On December 2, 2023, the Red Cross had to be called in to provide mattresses and emergency showers.^[10] On December 7, 2023, the Inspection of the Ministry of Justice and Security reported that the situation in Ter Apel was untenable.^[11] Fire safety were not in order, basic requirements for bedding and bathing were not met, and the risk of violent incidents was increasing.^[12] Subsequently, an overnight shelter was opened in Stadskanaal, making it no longer necessary for asylum seekers to sleep in the waiting area^[13] (see Criteria and restrictions to access reception conditions).
• Vulnerable people in (crisis) emergency locations: A report from the Dutch Council of Refugees in which 22 (crisis) emergency locations were visited concluded that in 17 locations were present vulnerable people whose (medical) needs could not be met.^[14] This includes individuals with severe physical or mental conditions, chronically ill individuals, and pregnant women. A particularly distressing case involves a man with cancer undergoing chemotherapy while staying in a (crisis) shelter set up in an event hall. In 2023, the Inspection of the Ministry of Health Care and Youth warned multiple times that long term stay in (crisis) emergency locations results in urgent risks for the individual health of asylum seekers, public health, and the continuity of health care. Among other things, the Inspection identified a lack of medical intake and tuberculosis screening before placement in crisis emergency locations, thus risking the placement of vulnerable people in unsuitable locations and the spread of infectious diseases, a lack of an electronic patient records and thus insuffient transfer of information between health care professionals, and a delay in providing necessary health care due to the limitation of health care to emergency care, leading to worsening health care problems.^[15] A report from three prominent health care NGOs from June contains similar findings^[16] (see Special reception needs of vulnerable groups and Health care).
• Reception of unaccompanied minors: Reports on overcrowding of the UAM facilities in Ter Apel continued in 2023. UAMs need to wait in Ter Apel in order to be transferred to one of the few UAM facilities in the country. In June, Stichting Nidos, the guardianship agency, published a shared letter with the COA urgently requesting all municipalities to provide reception places for UAMs.[17] Additionally, in April, the Inspections of the Ministries of Justice and Security, Healthcare and Youth and Education as well as the Dutch Labour Inspection sent another letter to the Ministry on the situation of the children staying in Ter Apel and in emergency locations, in which they conclude that the reception of children does not meet minimal quality requirements. Access to education and health care are insufficiently guaranteed, the child’s individual best interests receive inadequate attention and the overcrowding of locations leads to safety issues.^[18] UAMs are residing in Ter Apel for longer than intended, leading to a delayed start of education.^[19] Several months later the Inspections reiterated their concerns about UAMs in Ter Apel, detailing amongst other things that the housing of UAMs in Ter Apel is structurally full over capacity, and that under these conditions the physical and emotional wellbeing of the UAMs cannot be guaranteed^[20] (see Reception of unaccompanied children).

Detention of asylum seekers

• Immigration detention: a total of 3,710 migrants were detained in the Netherlands in 2023.
• Periodic visit of the CPT: In June 2023, the Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment published its report on its periodic visit to the Netherlands in May 2022. The CPT remains critical of the fact that immigration detention in the Netherlands is not covered by specific rules reflecting the administrative nature of immigration detention but by the same rules and restrictions as those applicable to persons detained under criminal law. The CPT also raised concerns about the use of segregation and isolation as a measure and as a disciplinary sanction in immigration detention centres and about the fact that women and men are accommodated together at the border detention centre at Schiphol (see Place of detention and Conditions in detention facilities).

Content of international protection

• Family reunification: The IND made public the general instructions for handling applications for family reunification by holders of an asylum permit, in order to become more transparent. This Work instruction 2023/2 includes also the instruction that a late submission (exceeding the three-month time-limit) may be considered excusable. Factors taken into account are: the number of days of exceedance (less than two weeks is excusable), the efforts the sponsor has demonstrated to file the application and the exceptional circumstances causing the late submission. With regard to the young adult policy, the Council of State ruled that the State Secretary may also consider a family tie to be broken if a young adult child has been living separately for a long time and has been proven to ‘shape’ their life independently, even in the situation where the young adult was initially forced to leave their family. Finally, the Council of State has ruled that the mere fact that a family member has entered and stays in the Netherlands during the family reunification procedure, is not a ground to reject the application for family reunification. In other words, the family reunificaton procedure continues and may lead to approval and issuance of the derived asylum permit to the family member (see Family Reunification).
• Revocation of status on the grounds of ‘danger to the public order or national security’: Although the CJEU ruled on 6 July 2023 that the degree of seriousness of a crime cannot be attained by a combination of separate offences, none of which constitutes a particularly serious crime on its own,^[21] the Aliens Circular still states that the assessment of a ‘particularly serious crime’ is based on whether the total sum of imposed sentences is at least 10 months^[22] (see Cessation and withdrawal).

Temporary protection

The information given hereafter constitute a short summary of the annex on Temporary Protection in the Netherlands, for further information, see Temporary Protection Netherlands.

Temporary protection procedure

• Non-Ukrainian nationals: Initially, displaced non-Ukrainian nationals who had a valid Ukrainian residence permit on 23 February 2022 – whether this was a temporary or a permanent permit – were entitled to temporary protection. However, this rapidly changed. As of 19 July 2022, non-UA nationals who merely held a temporary residence permit in Ukraine no longer fall under the scope of the TPD in the Netherlands. For those who had been registered, their right to temporary protection was to end on 4 March 2023. Beginning of 2023 the Secretary of State announced that temporary protection for this group would be extended until 4 September 2023; following a judgment of the Council of State in January 2024, temporary protection was extended until 4 March 2024. As a result of legal procedures against the ending of temporary protection, the Regional Court Amsterdam raised preliminary questions to the CJEU on 29 March 2024. On 29 March and 2 April 2024 the Council of State issued provisional measures in seven cases of non-UA nationals. On 25 April the Council of State also raised preliminary questions to the CJEU. Following this, the Secretary of State announced that all those covered by this specific group were allowed to stay in the Nehterlands until 4 March 2025, while awaiting for the CJEU to answer.

• Reception laws: Due to extraordinary circumstances as a result of the invasion in Ukraine, the Dutch government found itself unable to provide (emergency) accommodation to the displaced persons within the existing structure. This is the reason that the Dutch government activated, on 1 April 2022, the Relocation Population Act (Wet verplaatsing bevolking), which is state emergency law. To replace the Relocation Population Act a bill was created: the Temporary Act on the Reception of Displaced Persons from Ukraine. Once this law has passed the responsibility for the municipalities to provide for the reception of displaced persons from Ukraine will be transferred from the Relocation and Population Act to the Temporary Act. The bill has been sent to Parliament. The bill is being considered by the House of Representatives and has not passed yet.

• Reception capacity: On 20 October 2023 the initial or general reception centre (HUB) at Amsterdam Central Station closed as there were no more places available in reception centres either in or close to the capital. Since 27 February 2024, the HUB at Utrecht Central Station is temporarily closed, due to a serious shortage of reception places available in Dutch municipalities. As a result, men traveling alone and couples are no longer accommodated by the HUB. They are advised to report to a municipality on their own initiative. In case they are in need of a place to stay the night they can contact the Red Cross. Women with children, families with children and people in need of care do still have access to the Utrecht HUB. As registration in the BRP is not possible as long as people have not been able to find a municipality where they can be accommodated, the DCR is concerned people will be left too long without access to temporary protection and the associated rights.

• Proof of residency: Once a displaced person has been registered in the BRP, they have to obtain proof of residency from the IND. At that moment, the IND further assesses whether the person concerned should be granted temporary protection, which means that the IND could refuse temporary protection (and proof of residency). Complaints against the refusal could be made; in case of a refusal from the IND, the entitlement to rights arising from the TPD, such as the right to housing and to work, cease immediately, and the complaint has no suspensive effect, so a provision measure has to be requested before a regional court. Several judgments on requests to grant a provisional measure have been issued. The IND has issued new (follow up) decisions on the written complaints. In some cases temporary protection was granted and the objections were found justified. In many other cases temporary protection was refused by the IND. The authors are aware of appeals having been lodged with regional courts, but have as yet n ot seen any rulings on these appeals.

Content of temporary protection

• Access to asylum: To Ukrainian nationals who do not fall under the scope of the Temporary Protection Directive in the Netherlands and who have submitted an asylum application at the application centre in Ter Apel, the following applies. From 28 February 2022, the State Secretary (IND) did not have to take a decision on Ukrainians’ asylum applications on the grounds that a suspension on decisions on Ukrainian asylum applications applied, unless the time limit of 21 months to issue a decision on the asylum application has been exceeded in an individual case. This policy is based on Article 43 of the Aliens Act. The policy was prolonged until 28 November 2023. Moreover, rejected asylum seekers from Ukraine were not forced to return to Ukraine, however the measure regarding the suspension on forced returns was not formally extended, as the maximum duration of this suspension is one year. This is based on Article 45(4) of the Aliens Act. Nevertheless, the government still does not take any measures regarding forced returns of Ukrainian nationals.

^{[1] IND, Asylum Trends: Monthly Report on Asylum Applications in the Netherlands. December 2023, available at: https://bit.ly/3O7cDs9.}

^{[2] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2024:896, 13 March 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3U3FNKX.}

^{[3] QY v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, C-753/22, 12 December 2022, CJEU case information available at: https://bit.ly/48XiHfb and El Baheer v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, C-288/23, request filed 3 May 2023, CJEU case information available at: https://bit.ly/42n4Egc.}

^{[4] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2023:3275, 30 August 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/49j94XJ; information at the CJEU level (case C-551/23) can be found at: https://bit.ly/42wqfD5.}

^{[5] VWN, Gevlucht en vergeten?, August 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4205TBR; Nationale ombudsman en Kinderombudsman, De crisis voorbij, June 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3vIr2V0; Pharos, Rode Kruis en Dokters van de Wereld, Zorgen in tijden van crisis, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3TUvbiW.}

^{[6] KST 19637, nr. 3110, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3S6Ttns.}

^{[7] Letter to parliament, 6 June 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3vKQYzi.}

^{[8] NOS, ‘Evenementenhal in Assen wordt ‘wachtkamer’ voor aanmeldcentrum Ter Apel’, 24 May 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4217KGv.}

^{[9] See for an overview of all these different moments this blog on the website of COA, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4aUqED8.}

^{[10] Dutch Council for Refugees, ‘Extra voorzieningen voor asielzoekers in wachtruimtes Ter Apel’, 2 December 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3RX7eop.}

^{[11] Inspection of Justice and Security, ‘Letter about unsafe situation at Ter Apel’, 7 December 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4aTiACx.}

^{[12] Ibid.}

^{[13] RTL Nieuws, ‘COA: wachtruimtes IND niet meer in gebruik als nachtopvang’, 7 December 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/41WqBCP.}

^{[14] VWN, Gevlucht en vergeten?, August 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4205TBR.}

^{[15] Ibid, 1-2.}

^{[16] Dokters van de Wereld, Pharos, Rode Kruis, Zorgen in tijden van crisis, June 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/422N5Cc.}

^{[17] Nidos, COA, ‘Oproep COA en Nidos voor AMV Opvang’ 28 June 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/47Io0NS.}

^{[18] Inspection Justice and Security, Inspection Health Care and Youth, Inspection Education, Dutch Labour Inspection, ‘Kinderen in de noodopvang en crisisnoodopvang’, 19 April 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3O07tOr, 2.}

^{[19] Ibid, 4.}

^{[20] Inspection Health Care and Youth, ‘Inspecties: Situatie in Ter Apel is uiterst kritisch’, 31 October 2023, available in Dutch at https://bit.ly/3HngRrv.}

^{[21] CJEU, Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid v M.A., C-402/22, 6 July 2023, available at : https://bit.ly/3UpQ06b.}

^{[22] WBV 2023/25, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3S3k3Pi.}