Constitutional change proposed to expand temporary replacement of politicians for family care
A new proposal could allow Dutch politicians to temporarily step aside for family care, adoption, or long-term caregiving. The Council of State advises caution, warning the change may not effectively improve work-life balance for representatives.
| Key Data Point | Details |
|---|---|
| Proposer | Former MP Chakor (GroenLinks-PvdA), now succeeded by MP Tseggai |
| Current grounds for replacement | Pregnancy, childbirth, illness |
| Proposed new grounds | Birth, adoption, foster care, parenthood, long-term care |
| Council of State advice | Substantive justification needed; some grounds may be impractical |
| Affected bodies | House of Representatives, Senate, provincial/municipal/island councils |
| Publication date | 30 March 2026 |
The Council of State is an independent advisory body that reviews draft legislation, including constitutional amendments, to ensure legal soundness and alignment with public interest. Its advice is non-binding but carries significant weight in shaping government policy.
Openrijk is free and ad-free
Do you value our work? Help us stay online with a small contribution.
external link to whydonate.comRead the full translated article below
Advice on draft proposal to amend the Constitution on temporary replacement of representatives
The Advisory Division of the Council of State issued its advice on 25 March 2026 regarding the draft proposal by (former) Member of the House of Representatives Chakor (GroenLinks-PvdA). The proposal seeks to amend the Constitution to expand the possibilities for temporary replacement of members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, the provincial councils, municipal councils, island councils and electoral colleges. The advice was published on the Council of State’s website on 30 March 2026.
Purpose and content of the draft bill
Representatives may request temporary replacement. Under the Constitution, this is currently only possible in cases of pregnancy, childbirth or illness. Member of the House of Representatives Chakor (now succeeded by Member Tseggai, GroenLinks-PvdA) believes these grounds for replacement are insufficiently aligned with the current needs of representatives. She argues that replacement should also be possible in cases of birth, adoption, foster care, parenthood and long-term care. The draft proposal therefore seeks to include these grounds for temporary replacement in the Constitution.
Benefit and necessity
The Advisory Division acknowledges that expanding the possibility of temporary replacement could provide relief in certain cases. It also notes that representatives hold a personal and exceptional office. The Constitution stipulates that they perform their duties in the service of the public interest and according to their own convictions. The period of replacement must be substantial enough to allow for full replacement and sufficiently limited to preserve the recognisability of representation.
Given this, caution is warranted when expanding the possibilities for temporary replacement. The explanatory memorandum accompanying the draft bill does not sufficiently demonstrate that the proposed expansion is appropriate, necessary and effective. In many cases, temporary replacement would only make a limited contribution to improving the work-life balance, as the workload of representatives is influenced by a variety of complex factors.
The Advisory Division therefore advises that the proposed expansion be substantively justified in the explanatory memorandum. If this is not possible, it recommends abandoning the proposal.
Scope and implementation
The Advisory Division also highlights several points related to the scope and implementation of the replacement rules. It advises against including the grounds of birth, adoption and foster care in the Constitution, as these circumstances are typically short and flexible in duration. Replacement on these grounds would not align with the principle that a replacement should have sufficient opportunity to perform the office fully. The grounds of parenthood and long-term care, by contrast, may involve (very) lengthy periods. The Advisory Division recommends that the Constitution specify that replacement on these grounds must be uninterrupted and of adequate duration.
To prevent misuse, it is important to be able to objectively establish that a ground for replacement applies. Clarification is needed on the circumstances in which this is the case and how it can be demonstrated. If this cannot be done for certain grounds, the Advisory Division advises making replacement on those grounds impossible.
Conclusion
The Advisory Division has several objections to the draft proposal and advises against proceeding with it unless it is amended.
Read the full advice of the Advisory Division here.