Author
The report was previously updated in May 2025.
Note: This overview aims to briefly highlight the key developments from the previous year. As such, no sources are provided here, as they can be found later in the main text.
International protection
Asylum procedure
- Key asylum statistics: In 2025, a total of 25,839 asylum applications were lodged in the Netherlands. 24,073 first applications for international protection were lodged, mainly by Syrian (3,280), Eritrean (3,129) and Turkish (1,468) nationals. A total of 1,766 subsequent asylum applications were lodged in 2025. 15,540 decisions on asylum applications were taken during 2025. The overall recognition rate at first instance stood at 48% (down from 75.3% in 2024): 22% refugee status (24.9% in 2024), 19% subsidiary protection (46.8% in 2024), and 7% humanitarian protection (3.7% in 2024). 46% of judicial appeals regarding decisions in the international protection process were positive in 2025 (see Statistics).
- General extension of the time-limit for deciding on asylum applications: One of the main developments is the ruling of the CJEU in Zimir was its conclusion that there are strict requirements under which the time-limit for deciding can be extended to 15 months. The Dutch decision to extend this time-limit for four years in a row for all asylum seekers was thus deemed unlawful. As a result, the Minister already withdrew the last two extensions for the years 2024 and 2025. The Council of State ruled on 25 March 2026 that the first general extension was also deemed unlawful because of the gradual increase in the amount of asylum applications as opposed to a sharp increase almost simultaneously.[1] Only the second general extension still stands, as the Council of State did not specifically address this extension, but on the basis of Zimir and the Council of State’s judgments, it is highly unlikely this extension can be deemed lawful (see Regular Procedure).
- Backlog and waiting times: The backlog of cases and the waiting times continue to grow. The backlog of cases was 52,360 at the end of October 2025 in Track 4, the General Procedure and Extended Procedure, with an average waiting time of 17 weeks before the Registration Interview, and a further 86 weeks before the Detailed Interview, for an average waiting time of nearly two years, without considering the waiting time for a decision after the Detailed Interview (see Regular Procedure).
- Article 15c Qualification Directive: The designation of different regions and countries as areas in which a certain degree of indiscriminate violence exists has once again changed. Currently, the Minister will first designate whether there is an armed conflict in an area, and thereafter consider the extent of the violence, with level A being a ‘pure’ Article 15c QD-situation existing, level B meaning an area with a ‘relatively higher degree of indiscriminate violence’, and level C meaning a ‘relatively lower degree of indiscriminate violence’. In addition, there is a debate as to exactly when humanitarian circumstances need to be included in the Article 15c QD-assessment, which has led to the Regional Court of Roermond posing preliminary questions to the CJEU (see Differential treatment of specific nationalities in the procedure).
- Suspension of transfers to Belgium for single men: Since the ruling by the Council of State of 23 July 2025, Dublin transfers to Belgium for single men have been suspended, as the accommodation conditions there have worsened and the Belgian authorities have not increased the number of accommodation places, meaning single men will be placed on a waiting list, as priority is given to families, women and children. This means that Belgian authorities are indifferent to the situation of single men, reaching the threshold of the Jawo judgment (see Suspension of transfers).
The Regional Court of Rotterdam ruled that the situation in Greece for beneficiaries of international protection is still very bad. A new internal information message regarding beneficiaries of international protection from Greece has been published by the IND, in which the conditions for the ‘self-reliance’ criterium are anonymised.[2] After the publication of this internal message, the ‘self-reliance’ criterium has been invoked more frequently by the immigration office. As of yet, only two courts have ruled on this subject.[3] Both Courts ruled that the IND should be open about the conditions for the ‘self-reliance’ criterium. One of these courts (Rotterdam) also ruled that the situation in Greece for beneficiaries of international protection is still very bad, so the immigration office could not change the self-reliance criterium without further explanation (See First country of asylum – EU Member States and Return procedure). - South Korea is no longer considered a safe third country because its asylum procedure lacks procedural safeguards and good infrastructure.
- As of September 2025, the safe country of origin concept is no longer applied in the Netherlands due to the CJEU rulings on the safe country of origin concept stating that the Asylum Procedures Directive does not allow to designate a country of origin as safe with territorial or personal exemptions. Therefore, the Minister decided to suspend the application of the safe country of origin concept altogether awaiting the new rules from the Asylum Procedures Regulation (See Safe Country concepts).
Reception conditions
- Less than 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 centers over the course of 2025 (32,842 out of 79,984 people). All other residents stayed in regular asylum centres and/or temporary reception locations managed by municipalities. Different reports highlight how the majority of the (crisis) emergency locations still largely fail to meet the State’s obligations under EU law.[4] While some (crisis) emergency locations have adequate facilities, these are exceptions, and conditions elsewhere are equally distressing. The inadequate reception conditions at (crisis) emergency locations are especially alarming due to the long period of stay for up to one and a half years.[5] People suffer severely from a lack of privacy, tranquillity, and suitable nutrition. Sanitary facilities are inadequate and particularly unhygienic at too many locations. 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. Large differences between (crisis) shelters reveal that whether asylum seekers are able to experience decent reception in the Netherlands is subject to arbitrariness (see Reception conditions).
Detention of asylum applicants
- Statistics: In 2025, 4,190 persons have been detained in immigration detention in the Netherlands (see Immigration detention).
- Assessment of risk of refoulement together with the review of the detention order: In September 2025, the CJEU ruled in response to a preliminary reference lodged by a Dutch Court, concluding that Courts deciding on detention cases may also assess whether there is a risk of refoulement (Adrar, C-313/25) (see Judicial review of the detention order).
- Border detention: In September 2025, the Regional Court of Amsterdam lodged a preliminary ruling to the CJEU, asking in essence whether the facilities in the Detention Centre of Schiphol qualified it as ‘a specialized detention facility’ for border detention as provided in the Reception Conditions Directive (see Grounds for detention – Border detention).
Content of international protection
- Legislative reform: The Dutch legislative proposal to abolish the permanent asylum permit and to lower the duration of the asylum permit from 5 to 3 years is still under consideration. The government added these proposals also to the legislative proposal implementing the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum. Therefore, two legislative processes with partly overlapping proposals are currently being developed (see Residence Permit).
- Family Reunification: On 7 November 2025, the Council of State ruled that the right to family reunification remains intact if the sponsor obtains the Dutch nationality during the family reunification procedure. The Council of State ruled that the relevant reference point for the sponsor’s residence status for the purpose of the right to family reunification is the date of the (subsequent) application. Furthermore, new legislation entered into force on 28 March 2025, that extends the maximum time for taking a decision on a family reunification request from 6 to 9 months and establishes a legislative basis to determine a late submission of an application as objectively excusable (See Family reunification).
Temporary protection
The information given hereafter constitutes a short summary of the annex on Temporary Protection in the Netherlands, for further information, see Temporary Protection Netherlands.
- Shortage of reception places: In 2025, the shortage of available reception places for Temporary Protection (TP) beneficiaries in the Netherlands remained a major problem. In the opinion of the authors of this report, the situation worsened when at the end of 2024 the final HUB closed. This meant that coordination of available municipal reception places on a supra-regional/rural level was further restricted. Displaced persons were even called upon to find a place to live themselves in the very tight Dutch housing market.[6] The shortage of available accommodation also meant that displaced persons were placed in emergency shelters or hotels, even ended up without a roof over their heads or left for other countries, seeking protection. As a result, the pressure on municipalities to provide accommodation to TP beneficiaries increased. If a municipality refuses shelter, registration in the Municipal Personal Records Database (BRP) will also not take place. As a result, a displaced person is prevented from effectively exercising their rights under the TPD. Without registration, there is no access to the labour market and no insurance, making it very difficult to arrange housing. Under Dutch law, municipalities have an obligation to provide reception to beneficiaries of temporary protection. Developments in case law further clarified the scope of this obligation.[7] Regional courts confirmed that municipalities must provide accommodation when a displaced person reports to them. If no reception places are available, municipalities can choose to provide alternative accommodation. Placing beneficiaries on waiting lists or referring them to other municipalities, without having made sure accommodation will be available for them there, is not sufficient. According to the Association of Dutch Municipalities (VNG), municipal reception facilities for displaced persons from Ukraine have been almost fully occupied throughout 2025, leaving limited scope to accommodate newly arriving beneficiaries.[8] The VNG repeatedly emphasized that municipalities need additional support from the government, in the form of increased funding, clearer policy guidance and stronger coordination.[9]
- End of temporary protection for non-Ukrainian nationals: As of 19 July 2022, non-Ukrainian nationals who had a temporary residence permit in Ukraine no longer fall within the scope of the TPD in the Netherlands. Temporary protection for non-Ukrainian nationals holding a temporary Ukrainian residence permit who had registered before that date ended automatically on 4 March 2024. This was the result of the Council of State ruling of 17 January 2024.[10] However, divergent case law led to two preliminary references by Dutch courts to the CJEU: (a) by the Regional Court of Amsterdam on 29 March 2024, and (b) by the Council of State on 25 April 2024. On 19 December 2024, the CJEU ruled in Kaduna and Abkez (C-244/24 and C-290/24) that Member States are allowed to end temporary protection they have voluntary granted at any moment, even before the maximum duration of the temporary protection mechanism established at EU level has been reached.[11] The final rulings of the Regional Court Amsterdam and the Council of State are in line with this CJEU judgment.[12] Pending the rulings of the CJEU and the abovementioned national courts, beneficiaries belonging to this specific group of non-UA nationals were allowed to legally remain in the Netherlands under the effect of a suspension order (bevriezingsmaatregel). Non-UA nationals retained their rights connected to the TPD for as long as this measure was in effect. This suspension order ended on 4 September 2025 and, as far as the authors of this report are aware of, no major issues have been raised since then by this specific group.[13] There is no clear view of what happened to this group of non-UA nationals after September 2025.
- Decision on asylum requests after the refusal of temporary protection: The following applies to Ukrainian nationals who do not fall within the scope of the Temporary Protection Directive in the Netherlands and who had their asylum application processed. The policy that suspended the processing of asylum applications of Ukrainian nationals expired on 28 November 2023.[14] Since then, the IND decided on asylum requests of Ukrainian nationals in cases where the 21-month decision period had expired. It can be inferred from some asylum decisions that, according to the IND, an internal flight or relocation alternative is available in Ukraine (i.e., Ukrainian nationals originating from the eastern part of Ukraine can relocate in the western part of Ukraine). No country policy has been published yet.
- Processing asylum applications of TP beneficiaries: To obtain temporary protection in the Netherlands, displaced persons from Ukraine must file an asylum request. These asylum applications will only be processed after temporary protection has ended. In general, regional courts justified this suspension, although in 2024 some courts ruled that, in accordance with Article 31(5) of the Asylum Procedures Directive (APD), these asylum applications should be assessed within 21 months after the application was In two cases an appeal was lodged with the Council of State. On 2 April 2025 the Council of State lodged a preliminary reference to the CJEU regarding the time limits laid down in Article 31 of the APD (C-249/25, Jilin).[15]
- Increase of the individual financial contribution for accommodation: In 2025, the individual financial contribution required from TP beneficiaries with sufficient resources residing in municipal accommodation was significantly increased.[16] The monthly contribution for beneficiaries with sufficient income was raised from €105 to €244.22 per adult, with a maximum of €488.44 per family. According to the government, the increase intends to better reflect the actual costs associated with accommodation and to align the reception framework for TP beneficiaries more closely with that applicable to asylum seekers with sufficient income accommodated via the COA system. A minimum income of 115% was also set to ensure that taking up employment remains financially beneficial. A hardship clause was introduced, allowing municipalities to fully or partially waive financial contribution in individual cases where its application would result in disproportionate disadvantages. The government presented these amendments to the existing regulation as a step towards “normalization” and sustainability of reception arrangements for TP beneficiaries.[17] However, the Association of Dutch Municipalities reported implementation challenges, including an increased administrative burden and difficulties related to income assessment and collection of contributions.[18]
- Dutch long-term policy for displaced persons from Ukraine: As temporary protection for displaced persons from Ukraine under the TPD is set to expire in March 2027, the government outlined the contours of a long-term policy for after that date.[19] This policy consists of two parts, (1) the introduction of a transition document as a post-TPD residence right and (2) a voluntary return program. The transition document will be a three-year temporary regular residence permit. This means that, unlike the current situation in the Netherlands, TP beneficiaries will then be granted a residence permit. The transition document is intended to provide TP beneficiaries with a lawful and stable residence status after the end of temporary protection, while allowing them to prepare for return to Ukraine. This document will be granted ex officio, provided that the beneficiary has been granted temporary protection in the Netherlands before a certain date, passes a public order check and withdraws the pending asylum application.[20] The second part of the long-term policy concerns voluntary return to Ukraine. In addition to practical arrangements for return, such as documentation, the return program will include a form of financial support. Whether the long-term policy will be (thus) implemented is possibly still in question, as the government raised several major questions about the feasibility of this plan. At the same time, the government emphasized that processing the asylum requests of all 130,000 TP beneficiaries in the Netherlands is not possible. Further information on costs, feasibility and implementation of the long-term policy is expected in April 2026, in the context of the annual Spring Memorandum.
[1] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:1749, 25 march 2026, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4mV8zLs
[2] Internal information message IND 2025/20 Griekse statushouders, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/49vNS2x.
[3] Regional Court Roermond, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2025:20337, 3 November 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3YtXgPg; Regional Court Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2025:22749, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3YpB8Wd.
[4] Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid, Brief Toezicht Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid Ter Apel, 15 January 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3WmsWoR; VWN, Onderzoek naar ervaringen en behoeften van vluchtelingen in de opvang, December 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/40jjZ0F; VWN, Gevlucht en Vergeten? No. 2, January 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4hfWkVP.
[5] VWN, Gevlucht en Vergeten? No. 2, January 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4hfWkVP.
[6] Kamervragen over het bericht dat Oekraïense mannen zelf huisvesting moeten regelen, 22 september 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4bqZkiv.
[7] District Court Groningen, ECLI:RBNNE:2025:4074, 6 October 2025, available in Dutch at: bit.ly/3LqykFj; District Court Den Bosch, SHE/2480 (not yet published), 24 October 2025; District Court Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2025:15050, 22 December 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4qG7zf8.
[8] Figures on the reception of displaced persons from Ukraine in the Netherlands, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/49xdgFj.
[9] VNG, Escalatie van sociale onrust en vastlopende opvangketen, 22 September 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4pwrsnR.
[10] Council of State, 202305663/1/V2, 17 January 2024, ECLI:NL:RVS:2024:32Council of State, 202305663/1/V2, 17 January 2024, ECLI:NL:RVS:2024:32 https://bit.ly/4526G8l.
[11] CJEU, judgment in case C/2025/1519, Kaduna and Abkez, of 19 December 2024 via https://bit.ly/4pzcr4C.
[12] Council of State, 202402020/3/V3, 23 April 2025, ECLI:NL:RVS:2025:1827, available at: https://bit.ly/4qFSXfx; Regional Court Den Haag (Amsterdam), NL24.5401, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2025:12445, 1o July 2025, available at: https://bit.ly/4qJJNPa.
[13] Dutch Parliament, ‘Vervolg derdelanders met tijdelijk verblijfsrecht in Oekraïne’, 3 June 2025, ref.no 6413309, information only available in Dutch at: Kamerbrief over vervolg derdelanders met tijdelijk verblijfsrecht in Oekraïne | Kamerstuk | Rijksoverheid.nl; IND, War in Ukraine: Residency non-Ukrainians with temporary Ukrainian residence permit, available in English at: Residency non-Ukrainians with temporary Ukrainian residence permit | IND.
[14] KST 19637, nr. 3163, 6 September 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4stbjSZ.
[15] Council of State, 202402732/1/V2, ECLI:NL:RVS:2025:1473, 2 April 2025, preliminary questions, C-249/25, Jilin, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/453nFHi
[16] KST, Verzamelbrief opvang Oekraïne, 4 July 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4qKD0Vw
[17] Ministerie van Asiel en Migratie, Handreiking: Verhoging eigen bijdrage voor Ontheemden uit Oekraïne, published in July 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4jnPsIt.
[18] VNG, Uitvoeringstoets verhoging eigen bijdrage Regeling opvang ontheemden Oekraïne, published on 20 May 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4bj3LMd.
[19] Verzamelbrief opvang Oekraïne, 28 november 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3NgILf5.
[20] Instead of opting for the transition document, TP beneficiaries can choose to continue the processing of their asylum request; moreover, an asylum application can be submitted again at a later time.