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)
  • A reader sheds some light on the Dutch biometric passport challenges
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: [email protected]

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • On July 7, Gemini AI will access your WhatsApp and more. Learn how to disable it on Android.
  • German court awards Facebook user €5,000 for data protection violations
  • Record-Breaking $1.55M CCPA Settlement Against Health Information Website Publisher
  • Ninth Circuit Reviews Website Tracking Class Actions and the Reach of California’s Privacy Law
  • US healthcare offshoring: Navigating patient data privacy laws and regulations
  • Data breach reveals Catwatchful ‘stalkerware’ is spying on thousands of phones
  • Google Trackers: What You Can Actually Escape And What You Can’t

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • Integrated Oncology Network victim of phishing attack; multiple locations affected (1)
  • HHS’ Office for Civil Rights Settles HIPAA Privacy and Security Rule Investigation with Deer Oaks Behavioral Health for $225k and a Corrective Action Plan
  • HB1127 Explained: North Dakota’s New InfoSec Requirements for Financial Corporations
  • Credit reports among personal data of 190,000 breached, put for sale on Dark Web; IT vendor fined
  • Five youths arrested on suspicion of phishing
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.