Netherlands: Access to security files
01 March 1995
Following the Vleugels et al ruling of the European Court in 1993, in which the Dutch law on the Intelligence and Security services was rejected on several points, the Dutch "Raad van State" (State Council, the highest court in administrative procedures) decided on June 16, 1994 in the Van Baggem ruling to allow a citizen limited access to his BVD security service dossier. Mr Van Baggem suspected he was obstructed in getting a job, because the BVD had a dossier on him based on his involvement in the anti-nuclear movement in the late 1970s. The ruling implied that the intelligence law, with its provisions banning all access to dossiers, was invalid pending a thorough revision. Until the adoption of new intelligence legislation, access to classified files and documents will be governed under the law on the Openness of Administration (the Dutch Freedom of Information Act), which gives greater priorities to privacy concerns and citizen's rights of access to government data held on them.
In 1991 about 400 citizens united in the "Vereniging Voorkom Vernietiging" (VVV, Association to Prevent Destruction) to initiate actions against the BVD and other intelligence agencies in 1991. The initiative was launched after the BVD announced its intention to destroy a large number of its several hundred of thousand dossiers, following the end of the Cold War.
The BVD has conceded it has to start giving people access to their files, and plans to implement an extensive programme allowing up to ten persons to come and read through their dossiers each week, starting with people over 55 years old. It has also given in to a VVV request to explicitly define the terms under which access will be granted. Surprisingly, after years of dragging its heels, the security service has now agreed on including in the access procedures all materials (printed, digital, video, audio, microfiche, etc.) from all sources (including predecessor agencies and other government institutions) and categorized under any headings. A potential problems however is that the BVD has asked applicants to provide information on the "societal context" under which they expect information on them could be filed. This means people will have to supply the service with more or less detailed information on which groups they have been involved in, which demonstrations, etc. The Openness of Administration Act has explicitly excluded provisions requiring motivation for an information request, but the BVD simply says a general request will not be granted, and that it will not be able to find all relevant files without additional details.
In a local "access to dossiers" procedure against the Nijmegen Police Intelligence Service, a BVD branch within the police force, 20 requesters were also successful last week when the court ruled that the arguments used for refusing access where invalid. The Military Intelligence Service (MID) is preparing similar arrangements for access, the first "reading" sessions have begun.