MPs push for legal changes after pro-Hamas demonstration on Dam

About 150 people demonstrated on Amsterdam’s Dam on October 7, carrying a “We support Hamas” banner. Some chanted “Long live the 7th of October”, while others carried a Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine banner. The date marked the third anniversary of the attacks in Israel.

Police and prosecutors judged that these actions were not illegal under current Dutch law. Demonstrators only need to notify the local council before holding a protest. Authorities may intervene when a demonstration threatens public safety or public order, but the banner itself did not meet an existing criminal offence.

Police later stopped the group from moving towards Amsterdam’s Jewish quarter. That area includes the Portuguese Synagogue, the Jewish Museum and the Holocaust Names Monument. The episode has increased pressure on parliament to approve a bill criminalising certain forms of terrorist support.

A terrorist organisation is generally understood as a group that uses, supports or plans serious violence to intimidate civilians or pursue political aims. Governments can designate such groups so they face measures such as asset freezes, travel restrictions or criminal penalties. The article does not provide the EU’s detailed reasoning for the designations.

It identifies Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine as organisations on the EU terrorist list. Demonstrators carried symbols or banners associated with both groups during the Dam protest. Police and prosecutors nevertheless judged that the conduct was not illegal under the current Dutch law.

That legal gap is central to the proposed Dutch bill. It would create an offence for publicly expressing support for banned terrorist organisations, but only when the support aims to win others over to an organisation’s terrorist goals. The maximum proposed sentence would be two years in prison.

The Dam demonstration involved around 150 people, according to Het Parool. The group carried a “We support Hamas” banner, and some participants chanted “Long live the 7th of October”. Others carried a banner from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which is also on the EU terrorist list.

The article contrasts that figure with a much larger enforcement event in 2024. Around 320 people were arrested in Amsterdam after Mayor Femke Halsema broke up a pro-Palestinian protest. That protest took place on the same day as an October 7 commemoration on the Dam.

The figures show that Amsterdam has faced repeated demonstrations connected with the conflict and October 7 commemorations. In the latest case, police stopped marchers heading towards the city’s Jewish quarter, but the demonstration itself was judged legal under current law.

The bill submitted by Justice Minister David Van Weel would create three new offences linked to terrorist propaganda and support. It would criminalise glorifying the most serious terrorist crimes, distributing material that glorifies those crimes, and publicly expressing support for banned terrorist organisations.

The proposed maximum punishment is two years in prison. Van Weel amended the support offence after objections from coalition party D66. Under the amendment, support would be punishable only when it is intended to win other people over to an organisation’s terrorist goals.

The bill is already in parliament, but MPs are urging the government to move it faster after the Dam demonstration. Supporters view it as a possible way to address conduct that police currently cannot prosecute. PAX wants the bill scrapped, warning that activists, journalists and protesters could also be affected.

If the bill passes, publicly expressing support for a banned terrorist organisation could become a criminal offence in the Netherlands. The proposed maximum sentence is two years in prison. The amended version would require proof that the support aimed to win others over to the organisation’s terrorist goals.

That could give police and prosecutors a legal route that was unavailable during the Dam demonstration. A “We support Hamas” banner was judged legal under current law, while the proposed rule could make similar conduct prosecutable if it met the promotion requirement. The exact application would depend on the facts of each case.

The change could also produce controversy and wider enforcement. Peace organisation PAX says the law might be used against activists, journalists and protesters, and wants it scrapped. The article points to the United Kingdom, where at least 3,070 people had been arrested by the end of April for supporting banned Palestine Action.

The government’s bill reflects a wish to criminalise glorification and public support for banned terrorist organisations. Justice Minister David Van Weel submitted it in June and amended it after D66 objections. The amendment limits liability to support aimed at winning people over to terrorist goals.

Opposition MPs focus on the immediate demonstration. JA21 MP Ingrid Coenradie called the decision to allow it “appalling”, while SGP MP Diederik van Dijk asked why it was not broken up sooner. Mayor Femke Halsema described the event as “shocking and distasteful”, but said the protests were not illegal under current rules.

PAX takes the opposite view from supporters of faster legislation. It wants the bill scrapped, warning that activists, journalists and protesters could be targeted. These positions reflect different priorities: preventing terrorist advocacy, preserving existing protest rights, and protecting local safety and order.

Democratic societies protect freedom of expression and peaceful protest because people must be able to criticise governments and organise publicly. Those freedoms are not unlimited. Authorities may restrict conduct involving threats, incitement to violence or serious risks to public safety, provided the rules are clear and applied lawfully.

The Dam demonstration illustrates the difficult boundary. Police and prosecutors judged the “We support Hamas” banner legal under current law, even though the mayor called the event “shocking and distasteful”. Police did act when marchers moved towards the Jewish quarter, using public-order powers to stop the route.

The proposed bill would move the boundary by criminalising certain public support and terrorist glorification. Its amendment adds a requirement that support aim to win others over to terrorist goals. PAX says even that approach could endanger activists, journalists and protesters, so parliament must weigh protection against violence alongside space for lawful dissent.