Data on prosecuted cases only include hate crime incidents within the OSCE definition. Prosecutor data present the number of criminal discriminatory offences that can be legally qualified, rather than the number of incidents. One alleged criminal offence or hate crime fact can lead to the registration of more than one discriminatory ground.
The judiciary does not record hate crimes, as the discriminatory motive does not need to be proven in court or addressed in judicial decisions.
The discrepancy between the police and the prosecution figures can be explained by the different approaches to recording (including a perception-based recording and a broader framework for recording by the police), the fact that not all reported incidents lead to a prosecution (e.g., due to the victim's preference for an alternative solution or a lack of evidence), and the fact that not all registered hate incidents are found plausible by the prosecution.
The breakdown below does not include hate speech incidents, including insults, which were recorded separately. The category 'other' in the breakdown below includes incidents that may fall outside the OSCE's hate crime definition. The charts below present the total numbers for each bias motivation; disaggregation by the type of crime is available for some bias motivation categories only.
In 2023, a revised version of a draft bill aimed at introducing a criminal provision of general application on aggravating circumstances was pending before the Dutch Parliament. In line with the bill, when a discriminatory aspect is proven, the maximum term of imprisonment imposed may be increased by one third.
In 2023, the National Co-ordinator against Discrimination and Racism (NCDR) developed a multi-year programme against discrimination and racism. This initiative builds on a comprehensive national programme to strengthen anti-discrimination measures introduced by the NCDR in 2022. The NCDR works closely together with the different ministries and the National Co-ordinator on Combating Anti-Semitism (NCAB).
ODIHR. However, based on the available information, it observes that the Netherlands does not collect data on hate crimes at the level of the judiciary. In addition, ODIHR observes that the Netherlands would benefit from reviewing the existing legal framework in order to ensure that bias motivations can be effectively acknowledged and appropriate penalties imposed on the perpetrators.
ODIHR recalls that in Ministerial Council Decision 9/09, OSCE participating States committed to collecting reliable data and statistics in sufficient detail on hate crimes and to report such data periodically to ODIHR. To that end, hate crimes need to be distinguished throughout the recording and data collection process from discrimination and hate speech crimes. Participating States also committed to enacting specific, tailored legislation to combat hate crimes, providing for effective penalties that take into account the gravity of such crimes.
ODIHR stands ready to support the Netherlands in meeting the relevant commitments through its comprehensive resources and tailored assistance in the area of hate crime recording and data collection, as well as through further resources and tailored legislative advice.
🛈 Please note that the total number of incidents may be lower than the sum of incidents presented in the breakdown chart above, as some incidents involve multiple bias motivations.
🛈 ODIHR no longer presents descriptions of property attacks in the incident tables below. Data on property attacks are presented in the breakdown charts above. One property attack may target multiple properties or involve multiple types of attack.