Local officials are being threatened, and media and institutions have their independence questioned. Anyone reading the newspapers of recent weeks sees that the rule of law is under pressure, writes SCP director Karen van Oudenhoven.
What is happening in our society? We see politicians questioning the independence of NOS questioned. We see mayors, aldermen and other public officials jointly placing an advertisement in the newspaper because they want to draw a line against intimidation and threats. A mayor resigns after council members were pressured by citizens to vote against the arrival of an asylum seekers center. And local officials speak out in the press that they do not feel supported by national politics in implementing the Distribution Act.
If you had told me this news ten years ago, I would have said such things do not happen in the Netherlands. Yet now it is indeed the case. All signals show that our democratic rule of law is seriously under pressure.
The Netherlands under pressure
The possible consequences are serious. Because if democratically elected local officials no longer dare to speak freely, that undermines the meaning of local decisions. If journalists can no longer write uncensored, that affects the value of news. And if the integrity of the public broadcaster is questioned, critical scrutiny of politics by the media disappears.
What underlies this? First of all, part of the Dutch population feels that our identity is under pressure. Changes in population composition, in our norms and values, and in the way the public debate is conducted, cause people to identify less with the Netherlands of today. Then it becomes tempting to question fundamental rights such as freedom of religion and the right to equal treatment. But precisely then the rule of law is most important: as protection of a minority against the majority and to prevent escalating emotions.
In addition, many people feel that no solution is coming for the big problems in the Netherlands. The housing shortage, the climate problem, and the reception of asylum seekers have been problems for years – resulting in frustration, distrust and impatience. The call for ‘decisiveness’ is great and there is an increasing tendency to see procedures, laws and independent scrutiny as obstacles, especially when the outcome does not please citizens.
Some paint the Council of State as a ‘roadblock’, while this highest administrative court precisely tests whether decisions comply with the laws we ourselves – through our representatives – have made. In that context, the rule of law gets a bad image. What is meant as guardian of democracy is portrayed as its opponent.
Standing firm for the rule of law
What needs to happen? Political leaders must at least stand firmly behind the institutions of the rule of law and speak out without hesitation that intimidation is unacceptable. Those who threaten or try to silence officials because a decision is not liked, undermine the core of the rule of law. Now political support for officials sometimes lacks, while at the same time it is said that the importance of the democratic rule of law is great.
In addition, politics must work harder on a shared identity. Right-wing parties speak critically about Islam, left-wing parties struggle with freedom of religion in Christian schools. Compared to other European countries, there is much discrimination in the Netherlands. [European Social Survey (ESS) data (round 11, 2023)] Let politics convey much more what fundamental rights mean for living together in the Netherlands; which freedoms we want to allow, even where space is limited? The way D66 and CDA – parties with different values – already succeeded in the current formation to work together on a positive plan for the Netherlands is an example of how you would also want to see that in society.
No arbitrariness
There is also a positive story needed about the rule of law. The rule of law gives people confidence that power is not arbitrary. It provides certainty that you can claim legal protection if you are deprived of parental authority. But also that the government may not just look at our smartphones or listen in on our phone calls. These achievements are too easily taken for granted, while they are not.
You could say that the better a rule of law functions, the less visible it is. We only see that it is indispensable when we neglect it. Then achievements crumble and space for arbitrariness increases.
Therefore, we must protect the democratic rule of law. Not only in lectures or during election time. But by really working on it: by officials who stand firm for their cause, by politicians who take institutions like the Council of State seriously. And by making clear that citizens may disagree with a government measure, but are stopped if they want to undermine the system.
Those who dismiss the rule of law today as an obstacle to change will only realize tomorrow what they have lost.
This column by Karen van Oudenhoven appeared on December 9, 2025 on the website of the Financial Times.
