The Netherlands has long been known for its human rights-based legal system and inclusive social structure. However, recent developments in the treatment of asylum seekers raise questions about how well these core values are upheld in practice.
Lengthy Procedures
Asylum procedures in the Netherlands create serious uncertainties for applicants. After the initial application, the waiting period can last months or even years, becoming not only a legal burden but also a psychological one. During this time, asylum seekers are largely excluded from education, employment, and social life. This situation particularly harms children and young people, undermining their development and integration into society.
Poorly Timed Messages
In recent months, information materials about voluntary return were distributed at the Ter Apel asylum center just before the Eid holiday. This caused a public outcry due to both its content and its timing. The move was criticized for lacking empathy and was seen as the use of symbolic dates to send political messages.
Judicial Reaction
The substantial and unilateral reduction in financial support to VluchtelingenWerk Nederland gained significant public attention. Although the judiciary blocked this move, showing that legal oversight mechanisms still function, the increasing frequency of such interventions suggests a weakening of balance and consultation, particularly to the detriment of asylum seekers.
Youth and Social Participation
Another striking example was the cancellation of a planned Efteling amusement park trip for young asylum seekers after public backlash. Such social activities are not only about entertainment but also support healing and foster a sense of belonging. The cancellation reflects a lack of sensitivity in this area.
Distancing from Civil Society
Civil society organizations play a vital role, both in service delivery and in balancing policymaking. Volunteer work holds a special place in Dutch social culture. However, recent restrictions on modest incentives for volunteers in asylum centers suggest a perception that these organizations are being viewed more as entities to be controlled than as partners in social cohesion.
A Slow but Deep Transformation
Individually, these examples may seem like small steps. But together, they suggest a shift from a human rights-centered policy to a more controlling, restrictive, and exclusionary approach. This silent regression in the Netherlands’ asylum and migration policies may have far-reaching consequences, not just in this domain but in the country’s overall value system. The prolonged waiting times, symbolic exclusions, and limitations on social participation, when considered collectively, point not merely to a policy change, but to a concerning loss of direction.
