New law to criminalize glorification of terrorism sparks debate on free speech limits
A proposed law to penalize the glorification of terrorism and public support for terrorist groups is under scrutiny. While aimed at protecting democracy, critics warn it may restrict fundamental freedoms like free speech and religion. Citizens could face legal consequences for expressions deemed supportive of extremism.
| Key Data | Details |
|---|---|
| Legislative Proposal | Criminalizes glorification of terrorism and support for terrorist groups |
| Issuing Body | Advisory Division of the Council of State |
| Date of Advice | 25 March 2026 |
| Publication Date | 30 March 2026 |
| Key Concerns | Potential restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly, and religion |
| ECtHR Case Law Reference | Examines social context and incitement to violence in similar cases |
| Recommended Improvements | Clearer guidelines for prosecutors, stricter intent requirements, penalty alignment |
| Next Steps | Advice to be considered before submission to the House of Representatives |
The Council of State is an independent advisory body that reviews legislative proposals for compliance with constitutional and international law, ensuring they align with democratic principles. Its role is to provide balanced recommendations to the government and parliament before laws are enacted.
Happy with Openrijk?
Then support us with a small contribution
external link to whydonate.comRead the full translated article below
Advice on legislative proposal criminalizing the glorification of terrorism
The Advisory Division of the Council of State issued its advice on 25 March 2026 regarding the legislative proposal to criminalize the glorification of terrorism and public expressions of support for terrorist organizations. The advice was published on the Council of State’s website on 30 March.
New criminal offenses
This legislative proposal introduces criminal penalties for the glorification of terrorist offenses and expressions of support for terrorist organizations. The Advisory Division acknowledges that, for the protection of our democratic rule of law, criminal law must provide sufficient means to combat the spread of extremist ideology. At the same time, the proposed criminal offenses could restrict the freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and association, and freedom of religion and belief—fundamental rights that are essential to our democratic rule of law, as they ensure that people can participate in public debate without fear of prosecution.
Are freedoms being restricted too much?
The central question raised by this legislative proposal is whether the proposed criminal offenses impose excessive restrictions on these freedoms. Relevant in this context is the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on cases in which individuals have been punished for positive statements about terrorism. In such cases, the ECtHR examines several factors, including the social context in which the statements were made and whether the statements (indirectly) incited others to commit acts of violence.
Based on the ECtHR’s case law, the Advisory Division sees no reason to assume that the proposed criminal offenses, in and of themselves, constitute impermissible restrictions on freedoms. However, their application in specific cases could be impermissible if the relevant factors derived from the ECtHR’s case law are not properly considered.
How can the legislative proposal be improved?
The Advisory Division recommends that the explanatory memorandum to the legislative proposal address the various factors in the ECtHR’s case law. A clearer explanation could provide guidance to public prosecutors and judges when deciding whether to prosecute or punish acts of glorifying terrorism or expressing support for terrorist organizations. The Advisory Division also suggests imposing stricter requirements regarding the intent of the offender in cases involving the glorification of terrorism. Additionally, it advises aligning the maximum penalties for the new offenses more closely with those applicable to other criminal expressions that do not incite violence. Finally, the Advisory Division calls for attention to the practical implications of the legislative proposal, particularly for online investigations.
Conclusion
The Advisory Division has raised several observations on the proposal and recommends that these be taken into account before it is submitted to the House of Representatives.
Read the full text of the Advisory Division’s advice here.