Amsterdam protest response: Van Weel backs October 11 decision
The Amsterdam protest response now has Justice Minister Van Weel's backing. He accepts the reasons against intervention but wants a new law on glorifying terrorism.
Van Weel accepts the mayor’s reasons for not intervening, while urging lawmakers to criminalise the glorification of terrorism.
Justice Minister Van Weel now understands the decision against intervention at an October 11 demonstration. The protest took place in Amsterdam, the Dutch capital. Protesters displayed flags of Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist organisation, and expressed support for the group.
After talks, Van Weel accepted the reasons behind the Amsterdam protest response. However, he also urged lawmakers to advance legislation criminalising the glorification of terrorism. He acknowledged that authorities currently lack a clear legal basis to prevent a repeat.
Van Weel met Amsterdam mayor Halsema and local public-order authorities before making his comments. The justice minister said: “Ik heb me laten overtuigen dat dit de enige mogelijkheid was”.
His comments appear in a report by NOS, the Dutch public broadcaster. The meeting followed his earlier, strong criticism of events at the demonstration. He now says he better understands the considerations behind the decision.
Why authorities did not intervene
Halsema had described the expressions of support as shocking and offensive. However, she said they did not amount to criminal offences. In her account, that left authorities without grounds to intervene against those expressions.
Van Weel had previously criticised the events in the Tweede Kamer, the Dutch lower house of parliament. After the meeting, he said he understood the local authorities’ reasoning better. Still, he rejected the suggestion that his earlier response had been too forceful.
His change of position concerns the decision against intervention, rather than approval of the messages. Halsema’s account also separates her condemnation from her assessment of the law. Neither position treats the expressions of support as acceptable.
A proposed law, not a new police power yet
Van Weel wants lawmakers to move quickly on legislation against the glorification of terrorism. However, urging parliament to act does not change the law today. Authorities must still work within their existing powers.
The minister acknowledged the practical limit this creates. Without a legal basis for intervention, he cannot rule out a repeat. That is why his response now focuses on changing the law.
The supplied account gives no date for the proposed law to take effect. It also gives no details about penalties or the exact wording of an offence.
What happens next
The next political step concerns the proposed legislation. Van Weel has asked lawmakers to advance it, but this account identifies no vote date. Until any change takes effect, local authorities must assess demonstrations under current law.
For now, the meeting has narrowed the disagreement over the October 11 decision. The minister accepts why authorities did not intervene. However, his push for legislation shows he wants different legal options for future cases.
