Author
Asylum applicants are entitled to material reception conditions after they have shown their wish to apply for asylum. This can be done by registering themselves in the Central Reception Centre COL in Ter Apel. Before the start of the asylum procedure, applicants will spend at least six days (three weeks for minors) at a reception location. During this time, the asylum applicant is entitled to reception conditions set out in Article 9(1) RVA (Regulation on benefits for asylum applicants and other categories of foreigners 2005).[1] The organ responsible for both material and non-material reception of asylum applicants is the COA, according to the Reception Act.[2]
The material reception conditions are not tied to the issuance of any document by the authorities, but the IND will issue a temporary identification card (‘W document’) to asylum applicants while their asylum application is still in process. Asylum applicants can use this ‘W document’ to prove their identity, nationality and lawful stay in the Netherlands.[3] If such a document is not issued, the asylum applicant can apply for this. The law makes it clear that the asylum applicant is entitled to obtain it.[4]
Since May 2022, there have been multiple instances where newly arrived asylum seekers, needing to register their application at Ter Apel, have had to sleep on chairs, the floor, or even outside on the grass for one or more days. In July 2022, up to 300, and on 24 August 2022, 700 people slept outside in the grass at Ter Apel due to a lack of available spots in regular or crisis emergency locations.[5] It was the first time that Médicins sans Frontières (Artsen zonder Grenzen) operated in the Netherlands to provide medical and psychological consults in Ter Apel.[6] In subsequent years, overnight shelters (also referred to as ‘pre-registration locations’) have opened in the neighboring region of Ter Apel to temporarily house unregistered asylum applicants for whom there was insufficient capacity in the Central Reception Centre in Ter Apel. Since the opening of these locations, no more asylum applicants slept outside in Ter Apel – except for one night in 2023.[7] Having said this, in late 2023 the waiting area of the IND had to be used to accommodate asylum applicants, sometimes for multiple nights.[8] On 7 December 2023, the Inspection of the Ministry of Justice and Security reported that the situation in Ter Apel was untenable due to fire safety risks, inadequate facilities and an increasing risk of violent incidents.[9]
While the aforementioned ‘pre-registration locations’ (voorportaallocaties) around Ter Apel were originally intended for short term stay as applicants waited for the confirmation of their registration appointment in Ter Apel or Budel, in 2024 the applicants staying at these locations had sometimes already undergone the registration process.[10] The situation was due to a continued lack of reception capacity at the COL in Ter Apel, in other (crisis) emergency shelters and in normal AZCs. The location and size of the ‘pre-registration locations’ depended on the required extra reception places and the availability of the locations. The overnight ‘pre-registration location’ that was first set up in Stadskanaal, consisting of tents, was moved every few months to different municipalities surrounding Ter Apel, including 2e Exloërmond, Zuidwolde, Pekela and Beilen.[11] At this location, applicants (including families with children) arrived in the evening by bus, had dinner, showered and slept in large tents, and were brought back to Ter Apel in the early morning to spend the day there, often in portakabins (container cabins).[12]
Throughout 2024, there were reports of grossly unsatisfactory conditions in some of the ‘pre-registration locations’. For example, the ‘pre-registration location’ in Assen consists of an event hall in which ceilingless rooms with partitions, with bunk beds for four to six people.[13] The intended maximum period of stay at this location was first five and then twenty days, but both terms were often exceeded.[14] In April, the location was heavily overcrowded, with 700 residents while the capacity was 500.[15] In July, a doctor reported that several children residing at this location became underweight, could not sleep due to the noise and refused to use the sanitary facilities as they were very unhygienic.[16] The Minister stated that, after this report, the children who became underweight were transferred and some improvements were made in the diversity of the food and activities for children.[17] This location closed in January 2026. The Dutch Inspection of Justice and Security noted in 2024 that applicants stayed at the COL in Ter Apel and the ‘pre-registration locations’, which are clearly not suitable for lengthy stay, for up to six months, and that this is detrimental to both the mental and physical well-being of applicants.[18]
Portakabins that were placed on the terrain of Ter Apel were to provide extra reception and recreation space during the day, but applicants had to sleep there on numerous occasions, on matrasses on the floor. This happened frequently in April and May, and on two nights in September 2024.[19] In September, COA had to pay a € 70,000 fine to the municipality which Ter Apel is part of (Municipality Westerwolde) as making applicants sleep in the portakabins breached COA’s permit, among other things due to a lack of fire safety.[20] The Dutch Inspection of Justice and Security pointed out that, even though the number of arrivals has been relatively low compared to previous years, small increases (a few dozens) in the number of arrivals or delays in the opening of a normal reception centre immediately lead to a crisis situation at Ter Apel, leading to unsafe conditions.[21],[22] This situation continued into 2025 and 2026, with a recurring occupancy rate at COA locations of over 100%. The situation in Ter Apel is a result of a structural shortage in regular reception centres to which new asylum seekers can transfer after their first registration in the COL. The Inspection recommends that, as long as the problem of overcrowding persists, Ter Apel and its ‘pre-registration locations’ should be made suitable for the long-term stay and the high capacity that will realistically be required.
On 22 December 2023 the Municipality of Westerwolde sued the COA for breach of contract because the maximum capacity of 2,000 asylum applicants was exceeded time and time again in 2023.[23] On 23 January 2024, the Civil Court ruled in favour of the Municipality, stating that COA has to pay a legal penalty of € 15,000 for every day that there will be more than 2,000 people residing in Ter Apel.[24] Due to continuous overcrowding, by June 2024, the COA had reached the maximum penalty of € 1,500,000. However, it continued to exceed the maximum capacity almost every day.[25] Consequently, the Municipality of Westerwolde sued the COA again, seeking a higher penalty to enforce compliance. On 30 October 2024, the Civil Court ruled in favour of the Municipality again, now imposing a penalty of € 50,000 for every day that there are more than 2,000 people residing in Ter Apel.[26] In response to the ruling, the COA expressed concerns that imposing a penalty does not contribute to solving the problem, and stresses that it structurally needs more long-term reception locations to ensure sufficient capacity.[27]
COA lodged an appeal that was rejected by the Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden on 8 April 2025, upholding the earlier ruling of the Civil Court and the penalty of € 50,000.[28] The occupancy in Ter Apel dropped below 2,000 people between November 2024 and September 2025, due to the opening of several emergency reception centres and the prevention of closures of existing locations. On 9 September 2025 the maximum capacity of 2,000 was exceeded again for the first time in 10 months. This was due to a combination of factors, including the closure of a few temporary locations, permit holders that cannot move onward to Municipality housing, and a peak in new applications.[29] Calls from COA for more spots were insufficiently answered. Subsequently, the occupancy rate in Ter Apel has fluctuated between September and December 2025,[30] passing 2,000 on numerous occasions reaching a total penalty of almost € 2,5 million in early December 2025.[31]
Throughout 2025, the Dutch Council for Refugees reported several times that family members who arrived because of family reunion were denied reception. They often stayed for weeks or sometimes months in overcrowded situations with refugees in single or shared housing.[32] They had to ask COA by mail for reception places before their arrival ,[33] and were sometimes put on a waiting list by COA. For several months, the Red Cross was asked by COA to arrange hotel places for the family members. However, this temporary measure ended in summer 2025. Since autumn, the waiting list for family members is again being used, although now they receive some pocket money and will be placed with urgency in a reception facility when there are medical problems.
In May 2022, the EUAA signed its first operational plan with the Netherlands, to address temporary reception needs, as well as to provide operational support in the field of reception.[34] In December 2022, the EUAA and the Netherlands signed an amendment and extension of the plan for continued operational support.[35] The plan was subsequently amended and extended twice: for continued support in 2024 extending to both asylum and reception,[36] and for continuation of support until June 2026, with a focus on reception support.[37]
Throughout 2025, the EUAA deployed 52 experts to the Netherlands, mainly external experts (45).[38] These included 26 protection experts and 17 Junior Reception Child Protection Experts.[39]
As of 15 December 2025, a total of 23 EUAA experts were deployed in the Netherlands, out of which 17 were protection experts.[40]
In the Netherlands, new workflows were set up and launched in April 2025 for the identification and referral of special needs and vulnerabilities in the night shelter and the initial central reception (COL) area of Ter Apel. In this context, some 129 persons were screened by the EUAA, presented vulnerability indicators and were referred to the Dutch reception Authority (COA), while additionally the EUAA conducted special needs and vulnerability interviews with 34 vulnerable persons residing in the Night Shelter, between May and September 2025, when the relevant activities took place.[41]
In 2025, the EUAA delivered 3 training sessions to a total of 44 local staff members.[42]
The COA only provides reception to the categories of people listed in the RVA. The system is based on the principle that all asylum applicants are entitled to material reception conditions. However, according to Dutch legislation only applicants who lack resources are entitled to material reception conditions.[43] During the whole asylum procedure, the COA is responsible for the reception of asylum applicants.
As will be further addressed in sections below, during a reception crisis, asylum applicants and beneficiaries of international protection in all stages can be housed in (crisis)emergency centres.
Rest and preparation period: During the rest and preparation period, an individual is already considered an asylum applicant under the RVA because this person has made an application for asylum. So already during the rest and preparation period, an individual is entitled to reception. However, daily allowances are reduced during the rest and preparation period.[44]
Starting from 2019, this became an issue due to the long waiting times (see The rest and preparation period (RVT)). The RVA distinguishes between asylum applicants awaiting the start of their asylum procedure and asylum applicants awaiting the decision. On 29 July 2020, the Council of State ruled that this distinction is permitted by the Reception Conditions Directive.[45] The applicants pointed to Article 2(f) RCD for arguing that the distinction made by the RVA is not in accordance with EU-law. Article 2(f) RCD states that ‘material reception conditions’ include reception provided in kind, or as financial allowances or in vouchers, or a combination of the three, and a daily expenses allowance. However, the Council of State concluded that this Article in the RCD is merely an Article giving definitions and cannot be used as a legal basis for the right to receive a financial allowance for daily expenses. Therefore, the Council of State found that the distinction made in the RVA, resulting in not providing daily allowances to asylum applicants in the RVT, is not in violation of EU-law.
During the procedure started by the Dutch Council for Refugees in August 2022, the COA stated that asylum applicants would receive allowances during the Rest and Preparation period starting from 1 August 2022 – except for asylum applicants staying at crisis emergency shelter centres (See: Conditions in reception facilities). In March 2024, the RVA was altered on this point with retroactive effect to 1 August 2022.[46] Financial allowances for clothing and personal expenses are now provided to all applicants in the (pre-)POL including at (crisis) emergency shelters, as the stay at (crisis) emergency shelters is currently much longer than intended, and because the residents need this financial allowance to provide them with some autonomy.[47] This measure will be generally applied whenever and as long as the length of the Rest and Preparation period and the general asylum procedure substantially exceed the intended duration (three weeks).[48] It is furthermore acknowledged in the Dutch National Implementation Plan for the Pact on Migration and Asylum that the recast Reception Conditions Directive explicitly requires the daily expenses allowance to always include a monetary amount.[49]
Asylum procedure/awaiting the decision: During the actual procedure, asylum applicants stay in a process reception location (POL) and while they wait for the decision of the IND, they stay in an AZC. Asylum applicants whose asylum application is processed in ‘Track 2’, however, must – as of September 2020 – stay in a ‘austere’ reception centre. In this reception centre, they receive benefits in kind, they have to report daily, and extra security is present.[50] Even if the asylum applicant appeals after the rejection of their asylum application, they will remain in the austere reception centre. Children and vulnerable asylum applicants are excluded from the austerity of reception but must adhere to the austerity regime (reporting daily) in the AZC. In September 2023 the austere reception conditions (benefits in kind, daily reporting) were extended to Dublin claimants, although they will only be applied if they are residing in an ‘austere’ reception centre.[51]
Rejection/appeal: Pursuant to Article 5 of the RVA, the right to reception of the rejected asylum applicant continues to exist as long as no deportation decision is taken under the Aliens Act. Article 82 of the Aliens Act provides that an appeal against the rejection of an asylum application has an automatic suspensive effect even before the appeal is lodged. The asylum applicant therefore retains their right to reception if they lodge an appeal within 4 weeks and then until a decision has been taken on this appeal. From the moment the appeal is declared unfounded, the departure period of (usually) four weeks starts.
The negative asylum decision does not automatically have suspensive effect in all cases. There is no automatic suspensive effect in case of:
- a rejection based on the Dublin procedure (Article 30 of the Aliens Act);
- asylum applications declared inadmissible (Article 30a of the Aliens Act, with the exception of paragraph 1 under c – safe third country);
- manifestly unfounded asylum applications (Article 30b of the Aliens Act, with the exception of sub 1 under h – unlawful entry / failure to notify immediately);
- in the event of ‘not considering the case on its merits’ (Article 30c of the Aliens Act) and the rejection of subsequent applications on the basis of Article 4:6 GALA.
Nevertheless, even in these cases the asylum applicant does not immediately lose their right to reception, retaining it instead for the duration of the remedy period (four weeks after rejection). This can be deduced from the jurisprudence of the Council of State following the CJEU’s Gnandi judgment (C-181/16).[52] The Gnandi judgment shows that all legal consequences of a return decision must be suspended by operation of law during the legal remedies period. The remedy period is the period in which it is still possible to lodge an appeal, if it has not yet been presented. During this period, according to the Council of State, there is a national right of residence of a temporary nature.[53] According to Article 8(h) of the Aliens Act, the asylum applicant has lawful residence ‘pending the decision on appeal’. Based on the interpretation in accordance with the directive, ‘appeal’ should also be read as ‘request (for a provisional measure)’. The rejection of an asylum application as manifestly unfounded does not therefore lead to the loss of lawful residence. In addition, residence after requesting a provisional measure remains lawful until a decision has been made on that request, on the basis of Article 8(h) of the Aliens Act jo. Article 7.3 Aliens Decree (cf. Article 46 (6) and (8) of the Procedural Directive).
However, in the case of beneficiaries of international protection from other EU-Member States, the COA often does not wait for the applicant to request a provisional measure before ending their stay at the reception centre. Therefore, the Council of State ruled that asylum applicants, whose application is deemed inadmissible because they received protection in another EU-Member State, had the right to reception during the period following the inadmissibility decision in which they were able to appeal.[54]
Onward appeal: If the person lodges an onward appeal to the Council of State, there generally is no entitlement to reception facilities. However, the law subscribes that, in case that a provisional measure is granted by the Council of State, proclaiming that the asylum applicant cannot be expelled until the decision on the appeal is made, there is a right to reception.[55]
Beneficiaries of international protection: When the asylum application has a positive outcome, the asylum applicant will retain the right to shelter until there is housing available. For more information on the allocation of Housing see Content of International Protection – Housing.
Subsequent applicants: When an asylum applicant wishes to lodge a Subsequent Application they have to complete a separate form. From this point onwards, the asylum applicant enjoys the right to reception.[56] However, if the form is not completely filled in (e.g. when no new circumstances are put forward) the application will be disregarded and the right to reception will end.[57] When the form is complete, and the application is being handled during the short or extended asylum procedure, the asylum applicant enjoys the right to reception until the IND has made a decision on the application.
If the subsequent application is rejected, the applicant must ask for a provisional measure in order to keep their right to reception. In two judgments, the Council of State ruled that the main rule for subsequent applications based on EU Directives is that the processing of a request for a provisional measure after rejection may be awaited in the reception centre.[58] There are two exceptions: there is no novum and the subsequent application was submitted to frustrate the deportation (this is assumed if the deportation date is known). If the main rule applies to the case, the asylum applicant retains the right to reception after rejection of the subsequent application until a decision in appeal has been made.
Assessment of resources
According to Dutch legislation, only asylum applicants who lack resources are entitled to material reception conditions.[59] There is no specific assessment to determine the resources of the asylum applicant. If an asylum applicant has financial means of a value higher than the maximum resources allowed in order to benefit from the social allowance system (around €8,000 for a single person and €16,000 for a married couple), the COA can reduce the provision of reception conditions accordingly, with a maximum of the economic value equivalent to the reception conditions provided.[60] The assessment of resources is carried out two days after the asylum applicant has been moved to a Centre for Asylum Applicants (AZC).
In 2020, another problem arose: asylum applicants who received significant monetary indemnities, as a result of the legal penalties imposed on the IND that had not deliberated on time on their applications, were considered to have enough resources to pay for their reception. The COA considered the legal penalty payments as assets.
As the COA often did not immediately request the payment, asylum applicants had often already spent the sums received, for example on air tickets for their family members. A limited number of regional courts ruled on this issue, establishing that the COA was allowed to reclaim the costs for reception as the legal penalty payments are not considered as compensation for the asylum applicant but merely as a financial incentive for the IND to decide quicker.[61] However, one court ruled that the COA should have researched the full financial situation of the asylum applicant (both debts and assets) instead of just reclaiming the money.[62] Another court ruled that COA calculates the amount of money that needs to be paid back incorrectly.[63] On 28 March , a hearing was held about this issue at the Council of State.[64] During the hearing, a number of questions were addressed, such as whether the monetary indemnities can be regarded as compensation for immaterial damage. The Council of State also wanted to know if the COA is allowed to request the payment in advance. No judgment from the Council of State has been published yet. COA calculates for how long someone needs to pay until their financial means are below the threshold of the social allowances again. This could mean that the asylum applicant already is requested to pay for a reception they have not yet enjoyed and that they might not even access at all – in case they receive a permit and housing before.
[1] Article 9(1) RVA.
[2] Article 3(1) RVA.
[3] IND, ‘Vreemdelingen Identiteitsbewijs (Type W en W2)’, available in Dutch at: http://bit.ly/2y8JraF.
[4] Article 9 Aliens Act.
[5] NOS, ‘300 asielzoekers in Ter Apel sliepen vannacht buiten, hoogste aantal tot nu toe’, 17 July 2022, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3vMZieW; NOS, ‘Asielcrisis Ter Apel: vannacht hebben 700 mensen buiten geslapen’, 24 August 2022, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3IFeeDp.
[6] MSF, ‘Crisis at Ter Apel Registration Centre’, 11 September 2022, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3QsWpcx.
[7] NOS, ‘Ondanks noodverordening toch buitenslapers bij Ter Apel’, 28 September 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3SjCxLK.
[8] See for an overview of all these different moments this blog at the website of COA, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4aUqED8.
[9] Inspection of Justice and Security, ‘Letter about unsafe situation at Ter Apel’, 7 December 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4aTiACx.
[10] The information above follows from meetings with the IND, COA, AVIM and the Dutch Council for Refugees. The IND website at time of writing also mentions the possibility of a ‘pre-registration’ at: https://bit.ly/47rYv3m. See also the mention of both registered and unregistered asylum claimants in Assen in RTV Drenthe, ‘Expo Hal Assen blijft nog anderhalf jaar noodopvang asielzoekers’, 17 July 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3DV4tRk, and in Leeuwarden in NOS, ‘Noodopvang Leeuwarden sluit nog voor het nieuwe jaar’, 27 December 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3WkTPJY.
[11] RTV Drenthe, ‘Crisisnachtopvang asielzoekers naar 2e Exloërmond verhuisd: ‘Een uitkomst voor Ter Apel’’, 6 February 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3BTQTNw; RTV Drenthe, ‘Nachtopvang verhuist van 2e Exloërmond naar Zuidwolde: ‘Triest dat het nodig is’’, 2 April 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4jdOa2i; RTV Noord, ‘Tijdelijke nachtopvang voor 200 asielzoekers gaat naar Pekela’, 26 June 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4hadiFi; RTV Drenthe, ‘Nachtopvang Beilen redt overvol Ter Apel maar: ‘Situatie deugt niet. We zeulen met mensen’’, 14 October 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/42dESNl.
[12] RTV Drenthe, ‘Crisisnachtopvang asielzoekers naar 2e Exloërmond verhuisd: ‘Een uitkomst voor Ter Apel’’, 6 February 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3BTQTNw; De Groene Amsterdammer, ‘Asielzoekers in Kijkduin: Een sigaretje op het balkon’, 10 January 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4ak8Ota.
[13] NOS, ‘Asielzoekers blijven te lang in Expo Hal Assen onder ‘inhumane’ omstandigheden’, 6 May 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3BXLOnr.
[14] Ibid; RTV Drenthe, ‘Brandbrief heeft effect: opvang in Expo Hal aangepast voor kinderen’, 6 November 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/40jQXhL.
[15] RTV Drenthe, ‘Weinig doorstroom in overvolle Expo Hal in Assen: ‘Afhankelijk van andere centra’’, 29 April 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3WkT7MO.
[16] RTV Drenthe, ‘Brandbrief heeft effect: opvang in Expo Hal aangepast voor kinderen’, 6 November 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/40jQXhL.
[17] RTV Drenthe, ‘Brandbrief heeft effect: opvang in Expo Hal aangepast voor kinderen’, 6 November 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/40jQXhL.
[18] Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid, Brief Toezicht Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid Ter Apel, 15 January 2024.
[19] AD, ‘Wéér crisis in Ter Apel: manager stapt op, staatssecretaris doet zoveelste oproep om meer opvangbedden’, 26 April 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3Py4htR; NU.nl, ‘Asielzoekers moesten voor het eerst in lange tijd in wachtruimte Ter Apel slapen’, 25 April 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4gSs8k1; NU.nl, ‘Gemeente wil dat slapen in wachtruimtes Ter Apel stopt en geeft azc ultimatum’, 14 January 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4h6fQUY; NOS, ‘Toch geen buitenslapers bij Ter Apel: Stadskanaal stelt sporthal beschikbaar’, 17 September 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3DV34Kw.
[20] RTV Noord, ‘COA tikt 70.000 euro af voor gebruik portacabins bij aanmeldcentrum’, 27 September 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/40aKtBA.
[21] Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid, Brief Toezicht Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid Ter Apel, 15 January 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3WmsWoR.
[22] Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid, Brief Veiligheidsituatie COA locatie Ter Apel, 19 June 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4fWRXxY.
[23] RTV Noord, ‘Westerwolde sleept COA voor de rechter vanwege te hoog aantal asielzoekers in Ter Apel’, 22 December 2023, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3vDsqbK.
[24] Civil Court North-Netherlands, ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2024:129, 23 January 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3SVti4A.
[25] NOS, ‘Rechter: elke dag 50.000 euro boete bij te veel asielzoekers in Ter Apel’, 30 October 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3WglWtO; NOS, ‘Toch geen buitenslapers bij Ter Apel: Stadskanaal stelt sporthal beschikbaar’, 17 September 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3DV34Kw.
[26] Civil Court North-Netherlands, ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2024:4250, 30 October 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4gSF4WV.
[27] COA, ‘Grote uitdaging om Ter Apel onder 2.000 te brengen’, 30 October 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3WebYJi.
[28] Court of Appeal Arnhem-Leeuwarden, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2025:2124, 8 April 2025, available in Dutch at: https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/details?id=ECLI:NL:GHARL:2025:2124.
[29] COA, Bezetting ‘Ter Apel boven 2000 personen’, 9 September 2025, available in Dutch at: https://www.coa.nl/nl/nieuws/bezetting-ter-apel-boven-2000-personen.
[30] COA, Situatie Ter Apel, 17 December 2025, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4hb18vz.
[31] Hart van Nederland, ‘Aantal asielzoekers in Ter Apel weer boven limiet, dwangsom nadert 2,5 miljoen’, 8 December 2025, available in Dutch at https://www.hartvannederland.nl/politiek/beleid/artikelen/groningen-westerwolde-ter-apel-asielzoekers.
[32] Dutch Council for Refugees Press release ‘Het gaat mis met de opvang van nareizigers’ 16 april 2025, https://bit.ly/4jyhy3x
[33] Website IND, nareis, https://bit.ly/4qofk9F.
[34] EUAA, Operational Plan 2022 agreed with the European Union Agency for Asylum and the Netherlands, 6 May 2022, available at: https://bit.ly/3ypVNMJ, Annex 1.
[35] EUAA, Operational Plan 2022-2023 agreed with the European Union Agency for Asylum and the Netherlands, December 2022, available at: https://bit.ly/3FenQ5x, Annex 1.
[36] EUAA, Operational Plan 2024 agreed with the European Union Agency for Asylum and the Netherlands, December 2023, available here.
[37] EUAA, Operational Plan 2022-2026 agreed with the European Union Agency for Asylum and the Netherlands – Amendment 3, December 2024, available here.
[38] EUAA personnel numbers do not include deployed interpreters by the EUAA in support of asylum and reception activities.
[39] Information provided by the EUAA, 05 March 2026. In the course of 2025, 11 persons were deployed in the Netherlands under two different profiles. These cases are reported separately under each category.
[40] Information provided by the EUAA, 05 March 2026.
[41] Information provided by the EUAA, 05 March 2026. Vulnerability assessments in Greece are performed under reception measures for residents of reception facilities and therefore figures may also reflect non asylum applicants residing is such facilities.
[42] Information provided by the EUAA, 05 March 2026.
[43] Article 2(1) RVA.
[44] Article 9 sub 5 RVA.
[45] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2020:1803, 29 July 2020, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3HSupLV.
[46] Stcrt 2024, nr. 10912, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3PAJFkM.
[47] Ibid.
[48] Ibid.
[49] KST 32317, nr. 908, Implementatie van het EU Migratiepact, 6 December 2024, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/4fQZHSc. Attached to this document is the Implementation Plan itself, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/40sgs1z.
[50] Letter of the State Secretary (now Minister), KST 19637, nr 2658, 14 September 2020.
[51] Stcrt 2023, 26411, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3O3Jk9C.
[52] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2019:1710, 5 June 2019, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/49ucBmd.
[53] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2019:3442, 15 October 2019, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3urqBOS.
[54] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2020:8, 6 January 2020, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/48tCeCE.
[55] Article 3(3)(a) RVA.
[56] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:2157, 28 June 2018, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/49aFHqW.
[57] Article 30c (1) Aliens Act.
[58] Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2019:4358, 19 December 2019, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3STeJi3 and ECLI:NL:RVS: 2020:244, 29 January 2020, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/42Pq8Tv.
[59] Article 2(1) RVA.
[60] Article 20(2) RVA.
[61] E.g. Regional Court Middelburg, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2022:11143, 21 October 2022, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/49LO7F0 and Regional Court Groningen, ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2021:4635, 28 October 2021, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3uzXAAn.
[62] Regional Court Arnhem, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:14536, 27 December 2021, available in Dutch at: https://bit.ly/3SxL2lg.
[63] Regional Court Haarlem, Decision No AWB 21/4779, 28 April 2022, not published on a publicly available website.
[64] Council of State, Persagenda, available at: https://bit.ly/4qP37e9.