PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Challenge to the new Dutch passport fingerprint database rejected by The Hague [corrected]

Posted on February 2, 2011July 3, 2025 by Dissent

A Dutch reader sent me some disheartening news from his country today.

It appears that a challenge to a law requiring all Dutch citizens provide their fingerprints for passports was rejected by The Hague. The fingerprints are to be maintained in a centralized registry, and privacy advocates have raised concerns about privacy, the security of such records, and whether the requirement violates human rights. They have also raised concerns about misuse of the database for purposes other than passport use.

In its ruling (Dutch), the court found that the Privacy First Foundation did not have standing to represent all Dutch citizens (although 21 individuals were also co-plaintiffs in the action).  As far as the 21 individuals were concerned, the court held that they had other civil court remedies and that they lacked standing for an administrative court review because they had not yet experienced any problem with the new passport system as they had not even applied for the new passport (if I understood the translation correctly).  See CORRECTION under this post.

The court’s decision was reported in Webwereld (Dutch). The Webwereld report indicates a concern that the database – which was to be used only for passports – will become available to prosecutors for other purposes such as criminal investigations.

This is apparently the second time an attempt to get the issues heard in court has failed. The first time was in 2009 when the European Court declined to hear a case brought by Wikimedia. In that case, too, the court did not get to the issues.

Will any Dutch or EU court actually consider the substantive issues here? I hope so.

As reported yesterday, the European Commission is looking into the new passport requirements and system to determine if it violates EU data protection laws.

CORRECTION/UPDATE: Apparently, I translated incorrectly (no great surprise there). According to @djinh, Privacy First and the other plaintiffs brought the case in The Hague’s civil court, but the court ruled that they had to go to adminstrative court where there are cases pending.

Related posts:

  • EU Court of Justice: fingerprints in ID cards is not an EU issue (corrected)
Category: CourtLawsNon-U.S.

Post navigation

← ACTION ALERT: Contact your senator about S.193 today!
The UK Information Commissioner’s Office: A case for justifiable assisted suicide →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: info@pogowasright.org

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Congress tries to outlaw AI that jacks up prices based on what it knows about you
  • Microsoft’s controversial Recall feature is now blocked by Brave and AdGuard
  • Trump Administration Issues AI Action Plan and Series of AI Executive Orders
  • Indonesia asked to reassess data privacy terms in new U.S. trade deal
  • Meta Denies Tracking Menstrual Data in Flo Health Privacy Trial
  • Wikipedia seeks to shield contributors from UK law targeting online anonymity
  • British government reportedlu set to back down on secret iCloud backdoor after US pressure

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • Scattered Spider Hijacks VMware ESXi to Deploy Ransomware on Critical U.S. Infrastructure
  • Hacker group “Silent Crow” claims responsibility for cyberattack on Russia’s Aeroflot
  • AIIMS ORBO Portal Vulnerability Exposing Sensitive Organ Donor Data Discovered by Researcher
  • Two Data Breaches in Three Years: McKenzie Health
  • Scattered Spider is running a VMware ESXi hacking spree
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.
Menu
  • About
  • Privacy