Machine translations by Deepl

Ravage Digital, 27 March 2011: 'Fingerprint refuser loses lawsuit'

"Every Dutch citizen applying for a new passport or id card has had to provide their fingerprints since September 2009. Those prints are included in the new id document, but are also stored in a municipal database. The government is working on a central database in which all fingerprints will be stored in the near future.

Fingerprint refuser Louise van Luijk argues that this makes the state a suspect of everyone, because fingerprints can be passed on to the judiciary and the AIVD. That is stated in the Passport Act, although that part has not yet come into force. (...)

The administrative judge did not want to rule on the central storage and possible disclosure of biometric data to third parties in the future. "It is significant that a significant part of the legislation that the claimant disputes has not yet entered into force," the court said. Since Van Luijk is therefore not affected by that, in the court's view, the review of those parts of the Passport Act falls outside the scope of the proceedings.

Van Luijk is appealing the ruling to the Council of State. Partly because one of the judges at the hearing was clear about the fact that a mayor must test an objection to his decision under the Passport Act, under the General Administrative Law Act (Awb), against higher international law (as ECHR) when objectors invoke it, she hopes for a positive outcome.

In addition to Louise van Luijk's lawsuit, several proceedings are ongoing regarding the invasion of our privacy with the new Passport Act. For example, the Privacy First foundation has filed an appeal against the verdict of 2 February last. A resident of Nuth has filed proceedings on the merits against its mayor, while a resident of Amsterdam has filed an appeal for not issuing a passport without fingerprints."

Read HERE the entire article in Ravage Digital.