IND: ‘Judicial periodic penalties need to be abolished'
The Immigration and Naturalisation Service (IND) wants judicial periodic penalties for asylum applications to be abolished. This is stated in the State of Performance (link only available in Dutch) which the service published on Wednesday 25 June. The system of periodic penalty payments for late decision-making is designed to protect people from unreasonable delays. In practice, however, the system is turning out to be counterproductive.
Penalty payments are a considerable expense for the IND, with the amount spent totalling €36.8 million in 2024. In the first five months of this year, the IND has already paid out €25 million.
The system no longer works
The IND has been receiving more applications than the organisation is designed to handle for some time now. Although most applications are processed on time, this is unfortunately not the case for a large proportion of asylum applications, applications for family reunification and objection procedures.
As a result, many people end up having to wait too long for a decision. The number of cases that cannot be decided on within the decision period is increasing and the consequence is that more and more people are initiating legal proceedings and the IND is having to pay out more and spend more time dealing with penalty payments.
From penalty to improvement
As Rhodia Maas, Director-General of the IND, explains: 'People are entitled to get quick decisions, but penalty procedures are preventing that from happening. We certainly want to make faster decisions, but we are simply unable to do so. Periodic penalty procedures are only making the situation worse. The system is not fit for purpose and the whole thing is a waste of time and capacity, which we would be better off using to process asylum applications. Besides that, it is a waste of public money which could be much better spent elsewhere. For all these reasons, penalty payments should be abolished as soon as possible.'
Debate
On Thursday 26 June the House of Representatives is debating the Asylum Emergency Measures Act and an amendment which the Reformed Party SGP tabled to it on the abolition of judicial periodic penalty payments. An earlier attempt to abolish judicial penalties was not approved by the Council of State, which ruled that abolition was contrary to the principle of effective legal protection under European law. However, the IND now believes that a new approach might succeed.
As Rhodia Maas explains: 'Various annual reports and judgments given on this matter show that the view on the effectiveness of the judicial penalty has changed. There are also legal factors which make it worthwhile to reintroduce an abolition bill. I’m confident it will succeed this time. And it has to, because we need to get rid of those penalties as soon as possible.'