VZCZCXRO2957
RR RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHDBU RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA
RUEHLN RUEHLZ RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHTC #2595/01 3461528
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 121528Z DEC 06
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7664
RUEAHLC/HOMELAND SECURITY CENTER WASHDC
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 THE HAGUE 002595 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EUR/UBI, S/CT, D/HS, INL 
JUSTICE FOR OIA - JFRIEDMAN 
DHS FOR OIA 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PTER PINR PINS PGOV NL
SUBJECT:  SHARPER TOOLS FOR THE CT TOOLBOX:  DUTCH 
COUNTERTERRORISM LEGISLATION IN 2006 
 
REF: A) THE HAGUE 2583; B) 05 THE HAGUE 2648 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY:  The Dutch Parliament approved three 
significant pieces of counter terrorism legislation in 2006. 
The first, permitting the use of intelligence information in 
criminal proceedings, went into effect November 1.  The 
other two, which will expand the use of special 
investigative techniques in terror investigations, and ban 
organizations on the UN and EU terrorist organizations list, 
were passed November 14 and are expected to enter into force 
by February 2007.  The new laws complement the 2004 
Terrorist Crimes Law, and are expected to facilitate the 
successful investigation and prosecution of terrorist 
suspects.  The provisions of the three recently adopted 
counter terrorism laws and three pending bills are 
summarized in this cable.  END SUMMARY. 
 
Mechanism for Using Intelligence Information in Court 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶2.  The long anticipated bill to permit the use of 
intelligence information in criminal proceedings was 
approved by the First Chamber (upper house) of Parliament in 
September 2006, and took effect November 1.  The law, known 
as the Protected Witness Act, establishes special procedures 
permitting an examining judge to assess the reliability of 
official intelligence reports without exposing the 
identities of witnesses or releasing confidential 
intelligence information to the public.  It enables 
intelligence officers to testify as protected witnesses, 
either anonymously or otherwise, and provides for the 
protection of certain information for reasons of national 
security during a regular examination by the examining 
judge.  According to the Justice Ministry, the procedures 
are in line with European jurisprudence, which considers 
limitations on the rights of the defense acceptable if state 
security is at stake. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Passage of the Protected Witness Act is expected 
to facilitate the successful prosecution of terrorist 
suspects.  Counter terrorism prosecutor Alexander van Dam, 
who prosecuted the Hofstad and Piranha cases, welcomed the 
new law, telling Emboffs that the ability to introduce 
classified information developed by the AIVD domestic 
intelligence service without having to release it publicly 
would make it easier to secure convictions in future 
terrorism cases.  In its ruling in the recently concluded 
Piranha case, in which Dutch Moroccan terror suspect Samir 
Azzouz was convicted of planning a terrorist attack (Ref A), 
the court specifically noted that it had disallowed evidence 
based on AIVD intelligence reports, because there was no way 
under the law prevailing at the time of the trial to assess 
the reliability of the information without releasing it in 
court. 
 
More Investigative Tools in Terrorism Cases 
------------------------------------------- 
 
¶4.  (SBU) A bill approved by Parliament in mid-November 
expanding police investigative powers in investigations and 
prosecutions of terrorist crimes will enter into force in 
January or February 2007.  The bill lowers the threshold for 
the use of "special investigative methods," such as 
surveillance, infiltration, undercover purchases and phone 
taps.  Currently permitted only when police have a 
"reasonable suspicion" of an offense, such investigative 
methods will be permitted under the new law when there is an 
"indication" that a terrorist attack is being planned.  A 
senior police counter terrorism investigator told A/Legatt 
that in practice, the lower standard means that the police 
will be able to initiate meaningful investigations at a much 
earlier stage in terrorists' planning, as the "reasonable 
suspicion" standard has required that police have 
information about the facts and the circumstances of a 
terrorist plot before initiating a formal investigation. 
Prior approval from the prosecutor's office will be required 
to use the special surveillance measures. 
 
¶5. (SBU) The bill also authorizes police to stop and search 
persons, cars and objects in certain high-risk areas, such 
as airports, industrial sites, train stations and government 
buildings, without prior approval from the prosecutor's 
office.  In addition, prosecutors will be allowed, with the 
consent of the examining judge, to request data from banks, 
companies, and other private-sector organizations to obtain 
information about terror suspects; such requests for 
 
THE HAGUE 00002595  002 OF 003 
 
 
personal data are currently prohibited by the Dutch Privacy 
Protection Act. Finally, the law lowers the threshold for 
holding a terror suspect in provisional detention.  It 
allows suspects to be held for up to 14 days if there is a 
"reasonable suspicion" of terrorist involvement.  The CT 
investigator welcomed the new law as giving the police the 
tools necessary to conduct effective investigations. 
 
Ban on Terrorist Organizations 
------------------------------ 
 
¶6.  A second bill passed in November bans the operation in 
the Netherlands of organizations on the UN or EU terror 
lists; the law will enter into force February 1, 2007. 
Previously, only the bank accounts of such groups were 
frozen.  Now, individuals involved in continuing the 
activities of banned organizations will be punishable with 
an up-to-one-year prison sentence.  The law also provides 
for action -- including the confiscation and liquidation of 
the group's Dutch assets -- to be taken against foreign 
organizations conducting activities or pursuing objectives 
in the Netherlands deemed contrary to public order, 
including those not appearing on the UN or EU terror lists. 
A civil judge must make a determination that a foreign group 
has acted contrary to the public order before such action 
can be taken.  Under current law, civil action can be taken 
only against Dutch legal persons, including non-governmental 
organizations legally established in the Netherlands. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) Deputy head of the Foreign Ministry's Terrorism 
and New Threats Department Andre Van Wiggen welcomed the 
fact that the new law makes it possible to take measures, 
beyond freezing bank accounts, against organizations on the 
UN or EU terror lists.  He said it was unique that the 
activities of foreign organizations can be legally banned 
from operating in the country.  According to Van Wiggen, 
Parliament passed the bill despite continuing concerns about 
the EU's secret clearinghouse system and legal protection 
guarantees for such organizations. 
 
Pending Legislation 
------------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) Three additional packages of legislation proposed 
by the government in 2005 are still pending Parliamentary 
action or are under review by advisory bodies.  A bill to 
give the Justice Minister overriding powers would give the 
Justice Minister broad decision-making power in the event of 
a terrorist attack, including allowing the Minister to 
independently cancel air traffic, cell-phone service, and 
rail transport in the face of an imminent threat.  The 
Interior Minister would remain responsible for crisis 
control after an attack.  The bill remains under review with 
the Council of State, which must review all legislative 
proposals before they are submitted to Parliament.  A 
contact in the Justice Ministry's legislative department 
told us that the bill is still considered to be "very 
sensitive." 
 
¶9.  (U) The preventive CT measures bill would allow the 
government to issue restraining orders, based on 
intelligence or police information, to prohibit a terror 
suspect's physical proximity to specific locations or 
persons.  The Council of State negatively reviewed the bill; 
nevertheless, the Cabinet voted in April to submit it to 
Parliament. Parliament has not yet begun formal 
consideration of the bill. 
 
¶11.  (U)  A bill to penalize glorification of terrorist 
offenses would make the glorification, justification or 
denial of terrorist attacks, genocide or war crimes a 
criminal act if such comments could disturb public order. 
The bill would also increase the penalties for defamation 
and blasphemy.  This is the most controversial of the 
government's proposed CT legislative proposals.  Critics 
have expressed concerns about the broad scope of the bill's 
provisions; it is under review by specialized legal review 
bodies. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶12. (SBU) Enactment of the special investigative methods and 
protected witness laws constitutes a significant step 
forward for Dutch counter terrorism law.  The new laws 
complement the 2004 Terrorist Crimes Act, that made 
 
THE HAGUE 00002595  003 OF 003 
 
 
membership in a terrorist organization and planning a 
terrorist attack criminal offenses, and give police and 
prosecutors valuable additional tools to conduct effective 
investigations and prosecutions before terrorist plots come 
to fruition. 
 
Arnall