Inclusive Public Space:

Law, Universality and Difference in the Accessibility of Streets

Legal Report

Name of country: The Netherlands

Names of authors: Dick Houtzager, LLM

Contact email addresses for authors: dick.houtzager@gmail.com

Last updated: July 2020

A Context

A1 Constitutional and Legal System

A1.1 The Dutch constitutional system

For an understanding of the legal framework of the Netherlands, a description of the constitutional system is provided.

The Netherlands is a constitutional monarchy, with King Willem Alexander as the head of state. The king’s position is defined by the Constitution.¹ Although the king is part of the government, he bears no responsibility for his acts. Ministers are responsible and as a consequence, they have the authority to take decisions in their area of policy.

The trias politica in the Netherlands is formed by the government, the States General and the court system. The government prepares and carries out policy on national and international issues and proposes legislation. The States General (or Parliament), consists of two chambers with elected representatives. The Second Chamber of the States General oversees policies and legislation in first instance and is the more political part of the States General. The First Chamber of the States General, the Senate, has a more reflective role in law making. It discusses and approves or rejects the bills passed by the Second Chamber.

The courts, the third pillar of the trias politica, adjudicate cases.

A particular feature of the Dutch constitutional order is that courts cannot review primary legislation on compatibility with the Constitution.² A constitutional court does not exist. In the various stages of enacting laws, compatibility with the constitution is tested and checked by the government, by the Advisory Department of the Council of State³ and by parliament.

The Netherlands have a monist legal system in the sense that international law forms part of the national legal order from the moment that the relevant rule or provision becomes binding on the Kingdom. Before the ratification of an international treaty, the government will review existing laws and where necessary, amend these so as to make the legislation in conformity with the treaty norms. It is then for the courts to decide whether a specific treaty provision is fully implemented in the amended law, or that the norm is not properly transposed in national law. In those circumstances, the court has to decide whether the particular provision in an international treaty is directly applicable in the Dutch legal order.

In general, directly effective self-executing provisions of treaties prevail over national legal provisions. That is the basic notion in articles 93 and 94 of the Constitution.⁴

This implies that provisions of international treaties are substantially of a constitutional nature as they function as superior constitutional provisions in the Netherlands. Because courts have to give priority to these provisions over conflicting norms, the constitutional importance of these treaties is substantial.⁵

The issue of directly effective self-executing provisions of treaties has been subject of case law. In the ‘Right-to-strike’ judgment of 1986, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands first ruled on the question whether a treaty provision is directly effective and self-executing.⁶ The guidelines that can be derived from the judgment were extended in the ‘Tobacco-ban’ judgment (2014). In the judgment, the Supreme Court stated: “If neither the text nor the history of its formation makes it clear that the treaty provision is not intended to have direct effect, the content of that provision is decisive. The question is whether it is unconditional and sufficiently precise to be applied as an objective right in the national legal order.”⁷ This judgment has since served as a point of reference for lower courts.

The approach is leading for courts when applying international norms such as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) and the International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). As far as the ECHR is concerned, the Supreme Court’s explanation also applies to positive obligations. An illustration can be found in the ‘Urgenda’ case, where the Supreme Court decided that the State is under a legal obligation to apply climate change norms as stipulated in international treaties.⁸ The application of direct effect of the UNCRPD will be discussed below.

A specific position applies to legislation of the European Union. The applicability of these international norms in the Netherlands is not constructed through the application of articles 93 and 94 of the Constitution. The European Union legal order has become an integral part of the national constitutional and legal system. In consistent case law, starting with the landmark judgment Van Gend & Loos in 1963, the (then) European Court of Justice has ruled that “the European community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the states have limited their sovereign rights, is part of a supranational nature and applies directly in Member States.”⁹ Therefore, European Union law is directly applicable in the Netherlands.

Constitutional non-discrimination clause

The first article of the Dutch constitution is a non-discrimination clause: ‘All persons in the Netherlands shall be treated equally in equal circumstances. Discrimination on the grounds of religion, belief, political opinion, race or sex or on any other grounds whatsoever shall not be permitted.’¹⁰

This equality principle requires legislators, administrators and judges to treat people on an equal basis when setting rules or making decisions. Article 1 of the Constitution, which was included in its present form in the revised constitution in 1983, lists a number of non-discrimination grounds. Although disability is not among these, the phrase ‘on any other grounds whatsoever’ is meant to include it as a ground of discrimination.¹¹ The list of non-discrimination grounds reflects the social and political consensus of the types of discrimination deemed unacceptable in 1983. Over the years, views in society have changed and interest groups, academics and politicians began to suggest changes to the article. In 2010, a parliamentary initiative proposal was submitted with the objective to add disability and sexual orientation to the list of named grounds.¹² At the end of 2019, the proposal was still under discussion in the Second Chamber. Arguments in favour centred around the changed core values in society since 1983 and the stigma and discrimination experienced by persons with the characteristics of disability and sexual orientation. Arguments against adding the two grounds included the issue that other, still unnamed grounds of discrimination should also deserve being added to the list. The suggestion was raised to delete all grounds and to only refer to ‘any other grounds whatsoever’.¹³ The discussion seems to be far from over.

Legal order

The Netherlands legal system falls within the civil law systems.¹⁴ In the Netherlands legal order, statutory law is the primary source of law. Courts need to apply the statutory provisions to each individual case. It is assumed that statutory law regulates all cases that could occur. In cases which are not regulated by statutory law, the courts should apply the general principles on which a comparable statutory provision of the Civil Code is founded. Case law plays an important role, with courts taking into account the intention of the legislator, as expressed in the Parliamentary history of the law. Courts will try to find and apply general principles behind the law and interpret and explain legal principles if the statute does not give a clear reply to the legal question of the particular case. The Supreme Court upholds uniformity in law. Lower courts will take the decisions of the Supreme Court into account when giving their judgment.¹⁵

A1.2 The Netherlands administrative structure

The Kingdom of the Netherlands consists of four countries: Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten and the Netherlands. The Charter of the Kingdom of the Netherlands of 2010¹⁶ is the constitutional foundation of the Kingdom. It supersedes the Constitution¹⁷ and regulates the relationships and administrative setup of the countries within the Kingdom. The Netherlands are located in Europe whereas Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten are located in the Caribbean region. In the Caribbean region, another three islands are part of the Kingdom: Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba. With the reform of the constitutional structure in 2010, the three islands became public bodies within the European part of The Netherlands. Their status is comparable to that of a municipality.

The four countries have their own government and regulate their policy and affairs independently. In certain policy areas, there is a shared responsibility for all four constituent countries. These areas include the independence and the defence of the Kingdom, foreign relations, Dutch citizenship matters, safety and navigation of shipping and migration policy. In the Charter, these are termed as Kingdom affairs. In practice, due to its relative large size and resources, the Netherlands are leading in these matters.

Laws relating to street design, management and maintenance of roads and pedestrian areas are the responsibility of each of the separate countries within the Kingdom. For the purposes of this report, only the laws and regulations of the European part of the Netherlands are being described.

Within the European part of the Netherlands, four tiers of administration exist: national, provincial and municipal administration. The fourth tier comprises the Water Boards, a specific regional authority on water management.¹⁸ They will be described in the following sections.

In relation to the topic of this report, each authority has its own legal responsibility in design, management and maintenance of public spaces. These principles are laid down in the Wet herverdeling wegenbeheer 1992 (‘Redistribution of Road Management Act 1992’).¹⁹ The Act related to a major redistribution of road management among the various authorities as of 1 January 1993, while simultaneously revising the financial relationship regarding road management between those authorities.

A1.2.1. Central government

Within the framework of cooperation and consultation between national, regional and local governmental levels, policy on national issues is prepared by central government and forms the basis for legislation adopted by the Dutch Parliament.

Policies related to the provinces and municipalities is devolved to government at these levels, closer to the people and based on the principle of promoting public participation in democracy. Provinces and municipalities are mandated to make their own provincial and local legislation.²⁰

In the area of spatial planning, roads and transport, the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment is responsible for developing policy in the national context.²¹ The provinces are responsible for translating these guidelines into the regional context. The municipalities have the power and financial means to develop and implement local policy regarding spatial planning and the environment. Close cooperation between all levels of government is a characteristic of the Dutch system and ensures the necessary checks and balances.²² 

Cooperation and supervision of provinces is regulated in article 121 Provinces Act (Provinciewet). According to this article, the minister has the power to make a decision when the provincial authorities do not properly take a timely decision pursuant to relevant law. The minister may provide for an action on behalf and on the expense of the provincial authority.

A1.2.2. The provinces

Administration

The Netherlands are geographically divided into 12 provinces.²³ Each province has a provincial government, which consists of a directly elected provincial council and a provincial executive. Each provincial executive is chaired by a King’s Commissioner and has three to seven members. The members are appointed by the provincial council for a four-year term.

In relation to the topic of this report, an important task of the provinces is to decide about spatial expansion of towns and villages and the development of business areas. This is enacted in the Spatial Planning Act.²⁴ Also, provinces are responsible for building and maintaining roads, cycle paths and bridges within their geographical area.

In terms of authority, they have a supervisory role towards municipalities.²⁵ Provincial authorities may supervise municipal authorities with regard to spatial planning, construction, the natural environment, housing, monuments and the structural safety of buildings and other works. Municipalities report to the provinces annually, and the information thus obtained can be used for possible interventions. Provinces may decide to intervene in cases of neglect of official duties: if a municipal authority neglects to fulfil a joint administration task, the province may intervene and take over that task. It may suspend and annul decisions in the case where a decision by a municipal authority is in conflict with the law or with the public interest.

Street design, management and maintenance

The design of provincial roads is ruled by the provincial ‘structural concept’, the leading multiannual spatial development strategy. This policy and development framework designates where roads, railway lines, shipping routes, and areas for industry, farms, nature and recreation are to be located.

Where management and maintenance of provincial roads is concerned, each province drafts an Environment or Roads Decree. The purpose of the Decree is to protect the roads managed by the province and to ensure the efficient and safe use of those roads. For enforcement purposes, the provincial government is authorized to impose an administrative order.²⁶ See below under A5 for details relating to provincial rules and regulations regarding accessibility of public spaces.

For the purposes of this report, in chapter A5 the two provinces Utrecht and Flevoland will be described.

A1.2.3. Municipalities

Administration

Each province is divided in municipalities. Municipalities are responsible for a variety of tasks, ranging from issuing identity documents, registration of births and deaths, social welfare, housing and street design, management and maintenance. Over the past decade, a large scale merger of municipalities has taken place. This resulted in a significant decline in the number of towns and cities with their own local administration. On 1 January 2020, 355 municipalities existed in the Netherlands, as opposed to 431 in 2010.²⁷ As a result, the size of the municipalities increased, both geographically as well as in the number of inhabitants.

At the same time, the tasks of municipalities increased, notably in de social area. Since 2015, local authorities have been responsible for employment policies, youth care and care services for the elderly and persons with disabilities.²⁸ With the ratification of CRPD in 2016, municipalities have a statutory duty to periodically draft a plan about the implementation of CRPD.²⁹ In the parliamentary debate about the ratification, an amendment was adopted in which municipalities were obliged to adopt an inclusion agenda for all policy fields.³⁰ In 2019, only a small number of municipalities had actually developed such a broad inclusion agenda.³¹

Street design, management and maintenance

The decision to build new roads and streets is governed by local development or zoning plans (Bestemmingsplan). The obligation to establish a development plan derives from the Wet ruimtelijke ordening (‘Spatial Planning Act’).³² A development plan consists of destinations and rules. A destination indicates for each piece of land for which it may be used. A zoning plan is usually a mix of management (combating unwanted development) and implementation (enabling development). When, for instance, a new residential area is being planned, the zoning plan describes land use and the layout of houses, commercial and educational buildings, roads and pavements. After agreement by the local council, the plan needs to be approved by the province. The plan is then leading in the destination and development of the area concerned. It has a legal status and any construction activity by inhabitants requires a prior permit. Construction without a permit is an administrative offense and will lead to enforcement measures by the local authorities.

The Spatial Planning Act does not contain any provision concerning accessibility of persons with disabilities. The Act therefore does not provide a legal obligation for municipalities to include accessibility in their local zoning plans.

Under the coming Omgevingswet (‘Environment and Planning Bill”), a municipality could include an accessibility paragraph in its Environmental Vision. It can introduce an implementation paragraph in the environmental vision, containing an environmental agenda. An environmental agenda comes into being through a consultation process that tackles a certain problem.

A1.2.4 Water Boards

Administration

Historically, surface water management has been an important issue in the Netherlands. For centuries, the Low Countries have been exposed to coastal and river flooding. For the prevention of flooding and the management of rivers and the coastal area, specific water management authorities have been established as early as the 14th Century. The country is divided in 21 of these water board areas. Water boards are functional public organisations. The boards are democratically elected. At the head of the executive is the dike warden (‘Dijkgraaf’), who is appointed by the central government for a period of six years.³³ It is the water boards’ task to manage water level and water quality management, maintain navigable waterways and carry out wastewater treatment. The statutory tasks of the boards are codified in the Waterschapswet (’Regional Water Boards Act’).³⁴ The regional areas are determined by water-related geographical factors such as catchment basins, dike rings, pumping and water storage areas. Because the boards are functional public entities, they do not correspond with provincial or municipal boundaries.

Street design, management and maintenance

Part of the responsibility of the water boards is maintenance of roads within their direct service areas. However, road management is applicable in only five of the 21 Water Boards.³⁵ Currently, four of these boards are discussing the transfer of road management to municipalities.³⁶ Other water boards have no responsibility for road management. Roads within their service areas are managed by provinces or municipalities.

Applicable rules and regulations relating to road management are guided by the Roads Act. water boards do not specifically act in the development plans for roads. Because of their functional nature, the boards are involved in advising water management aspects in municipal spatial plans.³⁷ In view of these circumstances, the report will not further refer to water board rules and regulations relating to accessibility of streets.

A2 International Commitments

A2.1 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Ratification and implementation

The Netherlands signed the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on 30 March 2007.³⁸ Ratification took place on 14 June 2016, more than nine years later.³⁹

At the time of ratifying, the Netherlands government submitted seven interpretative declarations to the Convention. The content of these declarations has been criticized, among others by the National Institute for Human Rights in its independent report to the CRPD committee.⁴⁰ However, none of the declarations relates to the accessibility of public space.

Within the government, the minister for Health, Welfare and Sport was appointed as the coordinating minister.⁴¹

Amended legislation

In order to implement the Convention, the government proposed changes in five laws in the Implementation Bill.⁴² The Voting Act (Kieswet) and the Act on Equal Treatment on grounds of disability and chronic illness (further referred to with its Dutch acronym Wgbh/cz (Wet gelijke behandeling op grond van handicap/chronische ziekte)) were amended so as to bring them in line with the CRPD.

The equal treatment act was extended with a prohibition of discrimination on grounds of disability in the access to and supply of goods and services.⁴³

The Implementation Bill amended the regulation in the Voting Act so that ‘as many as possible’ but at least 25% of the polling stations in the municipality must be located and furnished in such a way that voters with a physical disability can vote as independently as possible. In the parliamentary process, the percentage of 25% was dropped and replaced by the obligation for municipalities to guarantee that all polling stations must be located and furnished to accommodate voters with a physical disability.⁴⁴

Furthermore, three other acts were amended: the Participation Act, the Youth Act and the Social Support Act 2015. In these acts, sections were inserted, laying down the obligation for each city council to periodically draft a plan on how the municipality will implement the CRPD.⁴⁵ The question how the implementation should take place is left to the discretion of each municipality.

Reporting

The initial government report on the state of implementation in the Netherlands was submitted to the UN CRPD committee on 14 June 2018, two years after ratification.⁴⁶ As far as accessible public spaces is concerned, the government states that this usually is a policy priority of municipalities. The report refers to various projects to improve the accessibility of local shopping and leisure areas.

The report mentions the coming Environmental and Planning Act, which requires the municipal environmental plan to take account of efforts to enhance accessibility.⁴⁷

In 2018, the National Institute for Human Rights presented its independent report to the CRPD committee.⁴⁸ In 2019 a coalition of NGOs presented their shadow report and submitted it to the Committee.⁴⁹ One of the issues raised in the NGO report is the development of the shared space concept (see below chapter E1.1). Persons with visual and other disabilities report that where these spaces are developed, there are no secure pedestrian zones any longer. Some people avoid going out in public places for fear of being run over.⁵⁰

Applicability CRPD in case law in the Netherlands

Since the adoption of the CRPD, several court cases have taken place in which a reference to the Convention was made. In order to illustrate how (lower) courts in the Netherlands refer to CRPD, three examples are given below. In general, if courts refer to CRPD in their case law, they do so to interpret domestic legislation.⁵¹ In some cases, the court considers the direct effect of the treaty provisions and concludes that the wording of the CRPD provision is not unconditional and sufficiently precise to be applied as an objective right. So far, no case law related to the accessibility of public spaces has been published.

Case 1.

Family law example: The termination of parental authority in the case of a mother with intellectual disabilities. The district court Amsterdam referred to article 23 CRPD in combination with article 8 ECHR to decide that having a disability in itself is not a decisive factor to determine that a parent cannot care for a child. No reason to terminate parental authority, even when previous children had been placed under guardianship.⁵²

Case 2.

Administrative law example: article 20 CRPD is not directly applicable in a case where a motorcyclist with one leg applied for driving license to ride a motorcycle with a ‘feetless bike system’. This is a system where a motorcycle is equipped with two expendable wheels for balance. The district court Overijssel held that article 20 CRPD only includes an in general terms formulated objective for States to take effective measures in order to guarantee the personal mobility of persons with disabilities. The provision is not of a nature that it can be applied as objective law and thus has no direct effectiveness.⁵³

Case 3.

Administrative law example: A person with a disability applies for a social benefit based on the Participation Act, to cover the monthly municipal parking fees for his modified vehicle. The applicant refers to article 4 CRPD. The court deals with the question whether article 4 CRPD is unconditional and sufficiently precise to be applied as an objective right in the national legal order. It concludes that the article only includes an in general terms formulated objective for States to ensure and promote the full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all persons with disabilities without discrimination of any kind on the basis of disability. Because of this general objective and instruction, the claimant cannot directly derive a concrete claim for the reimbursement of transport costs, including parking fees.⁵⁴

A2.2 UN Sustainable Development Goals

The Netherlands have adopted the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The central government, local governments and social stakeholders have developed a national SDG agenda and are working on the implementation.⁵⁵ The inclusion of persons with disabilities is one of the issues on the agenda. According to the third national report, local governments promote inclusion though local inclusion agendas. In the report it is noted that small and medium sized enterprises are involved by promoting accessibility.⁵⁶ The report contains no information about accessibility of streets.

A3 Multinational Law and Policy

A3.1 European Union

See: Inclusive Public Space Project: Legal Report, United Kingdom, chapter A3.1: European Union

A3.2 Council of Europe

See**:** Inclusive Public Space Project: Legal Report**,** United Kingdom**,** chapter A3.2: Council of Europe

A4 National Strategy, Law and Policy

A4.1 Equality and Inclusion

A4.1.1. Equality

Equality laws

Equal treatment legislation relating to persons with disabilities has been introduced in the Netherlands in 2003. The Wet gelijke behandeling op grond van handicap of chronische ziekte (‘Act on Equal treatment on grounds of disability/chronic illness’)⁵⁷ was then adopted. The Act was a result of the transposition of EU Directive 2000/78.⁵⁸

This Act focuses on protection against discrimination on the grounds of disability or chronic illness. The law names ‘chronic illness’ as a (separate) non-discrimination ground, next to ‘disability’. While in the EU Directive and in other international legal instruments, such as the CRPD, only the term ‘disability’ is used, the Dutch government motivated the inclusion of ‘chronic illness’ in the Act as follows: “The grounds of disability or chronic illness have so many similarities and entail so many comparable situations that discrimination on both grounds will fall under this bill. Moreover, in the Netherlands there are historical grounds for talking about people with a disability and people with a chronic illness. Every citizen is protected on the basis of this bill; this is not about having a disability or chronic illness, but about being discriminated against compared to the person who does not or does not have that disability.”⁵⁹ The position of the government on the topic has not been disputed in parliament or in literature.

With the introduction of the Act in 2003, the scope was limited to the specific areas mentioned in the Framework Directive: employment and vocational training. While limiting the scope to these areas, the government announced that in later stages the Act would be expanded to other areas. The Act was described as legislation under construction (‘aanbouwwet’).⁶⁰

In 2009, the areas of housing and general education were added to the law and in 2012 the area of public transport was added. In 2016, with the implementation of CRPD in the Netherlands, the area of access to and the supply of goods and services was introduced into the law.⁶¹

Equality legislation relating to older people as such does not exist. Also as a consequence of the transposition of EU Directive 2000/78, legislation on equal treatment on the ground of age was introduced in the Netherlands in 2003.⁶² The legislation forbids discrimination on grounds of age in the area of employment. In employment relations, older people may derive protection against discrimination. Where accessibility of streets is concerned, the law is not applicable.

As with the other equal treatment legislation in the Netherlands, the scope of both the Acts is restricted to situations where a contractual relation exists. As a consequence, unilateral government acts (‘eenzijdig overheidshandelen’) are excluded from the Act. According to the government, “unilateral government action has room for freedom of policy which, in principle, is not tested by the Netherlands Human Rights Institute against the equal treatment legislation. The government cannot discriminate, as article 1 of the Constitution prohibits that. Unilateral government actions can be tested against the General Administrative Law Act (‘Algemene wet bestuursrecht’), the general principles of good administration or possibly public tort connected with breach of statutory duty in the Civil Code. So there are enough options to ensure that unilateral government action meets the standards of the treaty.”⁶³

For the purposes of this report, this means that action against inaccessible public space cannot be based on the existing equal treatment legislation.

Criminal Code

Disability is one of the non-discrimination grounds addressed in the Dutch Criminal Code. Incitement to hatred or discrimination or violence against a person because of their disability is a criminal offence, as well as supporting activities aimed at discrimination against persons because of their disability.⁶⁴ In the area of supplying employment or goods and services, it is a criminal offence if ‘any person who, in the discharge of his office, practice of a profession or in conducting a business, undertakes or refrains from undertaking, for no reasonable grounds, certain acts which can have the purpose or effect in regard of persons with a physical, psychological or mental disability of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms’.⁶⁵

This last provision allows police and the public prosecutor to prosecute persons who, in the course of their profession or business, discriminate against persons with disabilities. This article can be seen as the penal counterpart of the Equal Treatment Act.

In 2019, the police registered 79 incidents of discrimination related to disability. Half of these incidents were associated with group insult; other incidents related to refusal of entry to a bar or club or to harassment at school.⁶⁶ The actual prosecution of incidents based on these reports is significantly lower. The latest available data (2019) show that three incidents relating to disability led to prosecution.⁶⁷ In all cases it involved verbal abuse using the word ‘mongol’ for persons who do not have Down syndrome.

Therefore, the area of design, management and maintenance of public space lies outside of the scope of criminal law in the Netherlands. Action against inaccessible public space cannot be based on the existing criminal legislation.

Monitoring and Oversight Mechanisms

The Act on Equal treatment on grounds of disability/chronic illness contains the obligation to evaluate the Act after five years on the effectiveness and effects of the Act in practice. For that purpose, an independent evaluation was carried out in 2009 and a report was sent to Parliament.⁶⁸ The conclusion was that the Act was clear, unambiguous and practicable in a legal sense. Individual legal protection for people with disabilities and the chronically ill had improved. However, the awareness among persons with disabilities and professionals was low, and a dialogue about the law did not exist.

Since then, other parliamentary evaluations or monitoring activities have not taken place.

Other Monitoring and Oversight Mechanisms

Monitoring of incidents of discrimination is provided for by local or regional anti-discrimination agencies.⁶⁹ These agencies receive and investigate discrimination complaints. Their work is based on the Wet gemeentelijke antidiscriminatievoorzieningen (‘Municipal Anti-Discrimination Facilities Act (‘Wet gemeentelijke antidiscriminatievoorzieningen’), which‘) entered into force in 2009.⁷⁰ According to the Act, municipalities are obliged to ensure that all residents confronted by discrimination can contact a local anti-discrimination agency for assistance. These anti-discrimination agencies (ADAs) have two statutory obligations, namely to provide independent assistance if discrimination is reported and to register complaints about discrimination.

In 2019, the ADAs received 4,382 complaints of discrimination, of which 552 (13%) were related to disability.⁷¹ The reports about disability concerned various matters, such as applying for a social support provision, taking a driving test, conflicts with youth care, availability of social allowances or benefits, or the use of a library.⁷² A few cases about inaccessible public space were reported, such as a complaint about bicycles and vans blocking pavements in a large city, an entrance to a museum which was inaccessible for wheel chair users and the inaccessibility of the square in front of a railway station.

A4.1.2 Accessibility

Strategy and Policy

Implementation programme

After ratification of CRPD in 2016, the Dutch government developed a policy for the implementation of the convention. Convinced that with the adaptation of the legislation (see chapter A2.1), the legal issues were dealt with, the government began a process for the implementation of the convention in society. In consultation with civil society, municipalities and the private sector, a multiannual plan was developed. It was presented to parliament on 18 June 2018 under the title Onbeperkt meedoen! (‘Unlimited Participation!’). After the adoption by parliament, the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports programme, began the implementation of the programme.⁷³ The programme has a running period of four years, from 2018 to 2021. The programme consists of seven lines of action: Housing and Living, Work, Education, Transport, Participation & Accessibility, Care and Support and the Governmental organization.

Accessibility is an issue in a number of the lines of action of the programme. In the action plan Toegankelijkheid van de Bouw (‘Accessibility of housing’), under the line of action ‘Housing and Living’, one of the objectives is to improve the accessibility and to ensure the availability of adequate housing for persons with disabilities. An important measure is to develop unambiguous and broad supported guidelines for accessible construction and renovation. Attention for accessibility of public space is part of this theme. The government announced that legal standards will be included in the forthcoming Omgevingswet (Environment and Planning Bill, see chapter A4.3).⁷⁴ According to the document, in case of new developments with consequences for the layout of the public space, the local environmental plan takes the promotion of accessibility in that public space into account. This takes the form of an instruction to the municipalities. It expresses that, with due observance of (often existing) policies, municipalities can take the importance of accessibility into account in order to ensure an equal use of public space by everyone. In order to map which problems exist and to explore possible solutions, the government announced to organize a broad discussion with stakeholders in the public and private sectors.⁷⁵

The line of action ‘Participation & Accessibility’ focusses on a selected number of areas: sports, cultural facilities, websites and apps, comprehensible information, the voting process and media and libraries.⁷⁶

Under the action line ‘Governmental organization’, the government is focussing on four themes in the coming years: employment, buildings and surroundings, information and public procurement. Measures to achieve the implementation goals are the creation of jobs for persons with disabilities; governmental buildings will all be made accessible, websites and online applications of the government will gradually be made accessible and public procurement will make sustainability a priority.⁷⁷

Partners in the programme Onbeperkt meedoen! are other ministries, organisations of persons with disabilities and organisations representing them,⁷⁸ the Association of Municipalities⁷⁹ and federations of employers and small enterprises.⁸⁰ The ministry

communicates about the programme by way of a newsletter and a digital magazine.⁸¹

Progress report

In 2019, the first progress report on the implementation plan Onbeperkt Meedoen! was published and presented to parliament.⁸²

The report recognizes that public space is not always accessible. It refers to the example of the city of Amstelveen, where the local authority is working on an accessibility hotline where local citizens with a disability can submit a report.⁸³

Where accessibility of public space is concerned, the report relates that the ministry is preparing a research assignment to assess the bottlenecks regarding the accessibility of public outdoor space at the local level.⁸⁴

Additionally, in February 2020, the minister for the Interior and Kingdom Relations sent a progress report to parliament. In the report, a range of measures is presented that were taken in the framework of the implementation programme Onbeperkt Meedoen!. The minister announced among others that building regulations with regard to accessibility of houses have been made more specific, that municipalities will be asked to make more adequate houses for persons with disabilities available, that the accessibility of governmental buildings complies with the current norms and that escape routes for persons with disabilities in emergency situations will be improved.⁸⁵

Indicators

Part of the implementation programme is the development of a set of indicators. These indicators are meant to track developments over a number of periods and to provide a research basis for the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sports to eventually adjust his policies. On the request of the Minister, the indicators have been developed by research institutions RIVM (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment)⁸⁶ and NIVEL (Netherlands institute for health services research ).⁸⁷ The data are, among others, based on responses from participants with disabilities in representative panels. These are organised by NIVEL and other organisations.

The RIVM baseline measurement presents indicators for the seven lines of action. According to RIVM, the indicators in the measurement correspond with the themes from the seven action lines, but they are not directly linked to the measures and initiatives taken by the various ministries.

The action lines and the indicators do not target the accessibility of streets and pedestrian areas. For the purposes of this report, three questions in the baseline study are more or less relevant. They concern the accessibility of shops, public buildings and parks and green areas. The outcome indicates that 84% of persons with physical disabilities find that shops are almost always accessible, 84% find that public buildings are almost always accessible and 83% find that parks and green areas are almost always accessible.⁸⁸ Follow-up measurements will be carried out and published in 2021. The outcome will be based on data collected in 2020.

In December 2019, the Minister presented an explanatory letter and the document containing the indicators to parliament.⁸⁹ On 19 December 2019, the Second Chamber discussed the progress of the implementation of CRPD in the Netherlands where the indicators were discussed. Whereas accessibility of houses and public transport as well as digital accessibility was part of the debate in the Second Chamber, accessibility of public spaces was only briefly discussed. A motion was tabled to request the government, in collaboration with the association of municipalities (VNG), to initiate a programme of action on improving the accessibility of public space. However, the motion was withdrawn before a vote took place.⁹⁰

Other Monitoring and Oversight Mechanisms

In its annual report on the state of implementation on 2019, the National Institute for Human Rights (NIHR) briefly addresses the reachability of houses from the public street. It calls on road authorities to ensure that houses are accessible from the street.⁹¹

Civil Society Engagement

In 2019, the Alliance UN Convention on Disability (‘Alliantie VN-verdrag Handicap’) has submitted a shadow report to the CRPD committee. In the report, reference is made to group interviews with persons with mobility and sensory impairments. Respondents narrated that the inaccessibility of buildings and public space and the insecurity caused by obstacles on pavements and ‘shared spaces’ in cities make it difficult to participate in cultural life, recreation and leisure activities.⁹²

Noteworthy Issues or Concerns

Equality

In the previous sections, it was concluded that the existing non-discrimination and equality legislation is not applicable in the area of public space. Issues arising in this area therefore cannot be judged against non-discrimination law by courts or the Dutch equality body, National Institute for Human Rights. As a consequence, in the legal as well as in the public discourse, inaccessibility of public spaces is generally not treated as a non-discrimination issue. Actions to promote accessibility do not have the same sense of urgency as other types of exclusion, such as in employment of education. It must be noted however, that anti-discrimination agencies do take up these issues and process complaints about inaccessible spaces. Legal redress for these cases is difficult. And, in its reports, the NIHR mentions inaccessibility as a human rights issue, to be addressed by local and national authorities.

Accessibility

The issue of accessibility in many of its aspects is part of the national programme Onbeperkt Meedoen!. So far, no specific legislation covers the accessibility of public outdoor spaces. The current Building Decree contains no standards on that issue; planning instruments consist of recommendations and handbooks without statutory powers. Only with the adoption of the Environment and Planning Bill in 2021, legal standards will apply. It remains to be seen, however, whether the new law will succeed in providing enforceable measures.

A4.1.3 Disability

Strategy framework & policy initiatives

Legislation and Policy

In the Netherlands, the estimated number of persons with disabilities lies around 3 million on a total population of 17 million. Exact data are not available, because data are collected from different sources, different criteria and methodologies are used and because definitions differ between data sources.

Table 1. Estimated number of disabled people in the Netherlands

Type of disability	Estimated no. of persons	Breakdown
Persons with intellectual disabilities	142,000	Of which 68,000 with a severe intellectual disability (IQ<50) and 74,000 with a mild intellectual disability (IQ between 50-70).
Persons with sensory impairments	262,000	Of which 12,000 with difficulty in hearing and 250,000 with difficulty in seeing.
Persons with physical disabilities	1,400,000	n/a
Persons with psycho-social disabilities	1,000,00093

Source: VGN: https://www.vgn.nl/feiten-en-cijfers-de-gehandicaptenzorg Accessed 26 June 2020.

National policies and legislation relating to disability are strongly coloured by a care approach. The umbrella name for these policies is care for the disabled (‘gehandicaptenzorg’). The sector is financed through four sources:

the Wet maatschappelijke ondersteuning (‘Social Support Act’), the Wet langdurige zorg*,* (‘Long-Term Care Act’), the Jeugdwet (‘Youth Act’) and the Zorgverzekeringswet (‘Health Insurance Act’). At the end of 2019, approximately 180,000 people were employed in the care for the disabled.⁹⁴ Current issues in care for the disabled mainly concern the quality of care and life, personal autonomy, the problem of responsibility for care at the transition of adolescents who turn 18 and care for children with a very serious multiple disability. The implementation of the legislation has been a point of criticism by a.o. the National Ombudsman. In a research report he stated: “The current health care system is designed based on the expectation that authorities will work in a more demand-oriented, responsible and efficient manner. However, three years after the transition in the healthcare domain, the Ombudsman sees that too little of this ambition has been achieved. Each agency implements its own arrangements from its perspective and works within its own frameworks. In the absence of an overview of the entire situation of the citizen, the authorities involved lack the sense of urgency to tackle and solve the problems in their entirety”.⁹⁵ In a response, the Ministry of Health (…) said it had started to work on four issues: more cooperation between health insurers and municipalities; improving the availability of client support; more flexibility in financing if the law is unclear; cooperation in the neighbourhood and continuous attention and focus on solutions in complex cases.⁹⁶

Within the policy of care for the disabled, little attention is given to the societal barriers that hamper inclusion of persons with disabilities in society. And with reference to the purpose of this report, there are no specific parts of the policy relating to accessibility of streets and public space.

A4.1.4 Older People

Strategy framework and policy initiatives

In 2019, of the total Dutch population of 17.2 million, there were 2.5 million people between 65 and 80 years old and 822,000 people over 80 years old.⁹⁷

National policies for older people revolve around issues of financing old age benefits and pensions and a growing appeal on health care. Loneliness among older people and the question of how to adapt housing for those who want to stay in their own home, are other topics in national policy.

There is no specific legislation regarding older persons in relation to the topic of this report.

Policy

As far as older people and policies relating to accessibility of public space is concerned, no information could be found. However, in 2019 a survey was carried out about the experienced safety in mobility among older people.⁹⁸

The survey indicates that 86% of people over 65 feel safe in traffic. 14% of the elderly mainly feel unsafe due to the behaviour of other road users, their own health (e.g. because of a hearing impairment) or crowded streets. Of the elderly respondents, 44% experienced restrictions in traffic: they mention obstacles and irregularities on pavements and cycle paths such as loose tiles and steep kerbs, lack of overview (at intersections) and the behaviour of other road users. Professionals in the care sector (GPs, physiotherapists and occupational therapists) were also interviewed. They indicated the need for more knowledge and information about various interventions, alternative modes of transport and road safety in their support for older people. As a result, on the website ‘Beter Oud’ (‘Better Old’) an informational page about mobility for the elderly was added.⁹⁹

A4.2 Transport

Current Legislative, Policy and Strategic Frameworks

Legislation

In 2011, the Act on Equal Treatment on grounds of disability/chronic illness was amended for the purpose of including public transport. All providers of public transport were required to gradually provide for accessible vehicles, buses, trams, metros and trains.¹⁰⁰ Responsible local, regional and national governmental departments were required to provide for a gradual adaptation of stops and stations. The specific requirements were laid down in the Besluit toegankelijkheid openbaar vervoer (‘Decree on accessibility of public transport’) ¹⁰¹ and in the Regulation regarding the accessibility of public transport.¹⁰²

The Decree requires providers of public transport services, as well as public authorities to provide for adjustments ‘to the level of unobstructed use of public transport that is at least necessary for persons with a disability to move independently in society, with or without help or with personal assistance.’¹⁰³ Adjustments are defined as ‘measures or facilities with regard to entering, using or leaving public transport and associated stops and stations, as well as organizing the use of that transport, for persons with a disability’.¹⁰⁴ The Decree lays down rules that vehicles (such as buses, trams, metros and trains), stops and stations and transport information are accessible.

The Regulation regarding the accessibility of public transport elaborates on the requirements of the Decree and gives rules about the accessibility of buses, trams, metros and trains, as well as stops and stations.

However, it must be noted that the rules do not apply to all forms of public transport. Smaller buses, with a maximum number of 7 passengers, are exempted from the regulations. In a case submitted before the NIHR, a traveller in an electric wheelchair complained that he was not able use a local neighbourhood bus. The small bus had no facilities to accommodate wheelchairs and the service was provided by volunteers. The NIHR considered that the vehicle the bus company put into operation, must be defined as a car. Cars are omitted from the scope of the Act on Equal Treatment and the underlying legislation. The refusal to transport the man could not be termed as discrimination.¹⁰⁵

Policy

As far as access to public transport is concerned, 46% of the existing bus stops in the country have been made accessible by increasing the height of the platform so as to allow wheelchairs and others to enter from an even level.¹⁰⁶ The percentage of accessible tram stops differs from 46% (Amsterdam) to 100% (Utrecht). Metro lines, which only exist in Amsterdam and the region Rotterdam/The Hague, are fully accessible.¹⁰⁷

Prorail, the public company that owns all 410 railway stations in the Netherlands, has been working on the accessibility of the stations.¹⁰⁸ The company states that since dedicated works started in 2017, all railway stations are adapted to travellers with visual impairments.¹⁰⁹ Guiding lines were laid out, obstacles on walking routes were removed, braille signs indicating the platform number were attached to handrails and platform edges were painted in contrasting colours.¹¹⁰ The objective is that in 2022, 90% of all passengers with a physical or sensory disability can travel to and from a railway station independently. Prorail aims to make all railway stations accessible in 2030. The Oogvereniging (‘Eye Association Netherlands’),¹¹¹ a DPO, became a partner in the project with the objective to actively involve persons with visual impairments in the design and application of the adjustments.¹¹²

Assistance for train travel for persons with disabilities is possible from 125 railway stations. The Netherlands Railways (Nederlandse Spoorwegen or NS), the largest, state-owned railway company, provides access assistance on request.¹¹³ Not all trains are independently accessible and the assistance service is still important.

In a policy document of 2019, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management provides an outlook to the general developments in public transport in 2040.¹¹⁴ With a reference to CRPD, the document describes that one of the policy goals is to strive to fully accessible public transport in 2040. The policy document contains a section on accessibility and inclusion, which promises the introduction of new services and new providers of transport.¹¹⁵

Other Monitoring and Oversight Mechanisms

The College voor de Rechten van de Mens, the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights or NIHR,¹¹⁶ is the national monitoring body for CRPD. It reports annually about the state of implementation of CRPD in the Netherlands. In its annual report of 2019,¹¹⁷ the NIHR notes that the environment of many bus and tram stops and railway stations lacks accessibility. Even if bus stops or railway stations themselves are accessible, the route towards them is often inaccessible. Street crossings are dangerous or obstacles on footpaths block the way. In addition, the transfer from a railway station to the nearest bus stop is difficult in some cases. Walking routes are not properly connected, e.g. because guiding lines in the railway station are not extended into the bus station. According to the NIHR, these difficulties discourage persons with disabilities from using public transport. In order to solve this, the Institute advises to initiate a better consultation process between municipalities and public transport authorities.¹¹⁸

Civil Society Engagement

DPOs have been involved in talks about accessibility of public transport, and pointed out the shortcomings in the accessibility provisions. Their experience and knowledge was used to adapt plans and policies.

A4.3 Planning

Current Legislative, Policy and Strategic Frameworks

Spatial Planning Act

Street design, management and maintenance are issues which are determined at the end of a process of spatial planning. When the overall design of an urban or rural area has been determined, filling in of the actual space with streets and (residential) areas takes place. In the following section, the legal system of spatial planning in the Netherlands is described.

The main legal instrument in spatial planning is the Wet ruimtelijke ordening or Wro (‘Spatial Planning Act’).¹¹⁹ The Spatial Planning Act is the instrument for dividing spatial needs such as living, working, recreation, mobility, water and nature in a coherent manner.¹²⁰ The Act, mainly contains framework provisions. It makes a clear distinction between policy and legal safeguarding.

In the area of policy, the Spatial Planning Act requires every municipality, province and the central government to develop a structural vision, in which the spatial development in the respective domains is described.

The structural vision is a substantive guiding document for spatial development. The municipalities, provinces and central government are obliged to establish one or more structural visions for their territory in the context of good spatial planning. It contains the main features of the spatial policy for the national, provincial and municipal territory and it indicates how to implement it.

The legal safeguarding of the policies takes place in zoning plans, integration plans and management regulations.

The structural vision mainly has an internal structuring function. There is no hierarchical relationship between structural visions of central government, province and municipality. It does not impose obligations, because it is a policy and development framework, not an assessment framework.

The municipal council proposes the structural vision for the municipal permanent, provincial councils for the province and the Minister of Infrastructure and Water Management for the central government. Structural visions and local development plans are published on a central website.¹²¹ The current government structural vision was drafted in 2012 and describes the country’s spatial ambitions until 2040.¹²²

As far as accessibility of streets and public space is concerned, the government’s structural vision does not mention the position of persons with disabilities. Accessibility as a topic is described as an economic requirement in terms of transport and mobility, not in terms of accessibility for persons with disabilities. In 2012, the year of drafting the structural vision, the Netherlands had not ratified CRPD.

Building Decree

A second relevant law is the Building Decree (‘Bouwbesluit’).¹²³ The Decree, which is the technical elaboration of the Housing Act (‘Woningwet’),¹²⁴ comprises technical regulations about the (re-)construction and demolition of buildings, about the condition and use of existing buildings, open yards and grounds and about safety during construction and demolition. These are the regulations that guarantee the minimum necessary quality of construction works.

The Building Decree contains certain accessibility requirements. Since 2003, in the Building Decree it is assumed that accessibility means that there will be no special facilities for disabled people. Instead, the requirements ensure that the user spaces are sufficiently usable for everyone, including persons with disabilities. The accessibility requirements of the Building Decree only apply to new construction and renovation, not to existing construction.

It contains sections about the size and composition of accessible areas in residential and commercial buildings. Although the main content of the Building Decree refers to the built environment, article 5.1.3. requires the connecting road between a public street and a building to have minimal width and height differences.¹²⁵

Based on these principles, it is left to the municipalities to address accessibility of public spaces.

Mobility policy

For a long time, walking and the use of roads by pedestrians has been treated as a policy subject regarding road safety. Pedestrians were termed as vulnerable road users and policy measures were aimed at improving their safety.¹²⁶ Within the central government, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management is responsible for mobility. One of the recent policy areas is the development and stimulation of walking as an important means of transport. In 2019, the Ministry established a national platform on the topic of walking: ‘Space for Walking’ (‘Ruimte voor Lopen’).¹²⁷ The platform comprises of around 30 participating organisations, ranging from expertise centres such as CROW¹²⁸ and SWOV¹²⁹ to interest organisations for leisure walkers such as Wandelnet¹³⁰ and for persons with disabilities such as Ieder(in).¹³¹ The members of the platform are developing a strategic agenda to create an impulse for walking as a mobility issue. The agenda will be presented in October 2020.¹³² Various participating organisations are proponents of accessibility and the expectation is that accessibility of pedestrian areas is one of the topics.

Voluntary standards

In the planning and design of the built environment and streets, the majority of municipalities apply standards developed by the leading not for profit organisation, CROW.¹³³ CROW is active in the design, construction and management of roads and other traffic and transport facilities. It develops guidelines and manuals with details of dimensions and layout of public spaces. For the purposes of accessibility of streets, the ASVV manual¹³⁴ is an important source. The width of pavements, the type of surface and the recommended materials are described in detail in the manual. Although the ASVV is not legislation, administrative courts attach a high relevance to it. Because the ASVV standards are being referred to and applied by municipalities and because of the lack of statutory law, courts follow the content of the manual. However, it is settled case law that the ASVV contains recommendations. The municipality is not obliged to follow these. And in case a municipality has applied it as a guideline, it may deviate from this with due motivation.¹³⁵

Future developments

The existing Spatial Planning Act and the Building Decree will in time be replaced by an new, comprehensive Act, the Environment and Planning Bill (‘Omgevingswet’). The Bill is currently under review in the First Chamber.¹³⁶ The date of entry into force has been postponed a number of times. It is now envisaged that the law will enter into force in 2021.¹³⁷

According to the Dutch government, the new Act seeks to modernise, harmonise and simplify current rules on land use planning, environmental protection, nature conservation, construction of buildings, protection of cultural heritage, water management, urban and rural redevelopment, development of major public and private works and mining and earth removal and integrate these rules into one legal framework.

The initial Bill did not contain specific sections relating to accessibility of public spaces for persons with disabilities.

During the parliamentary debate in the Second Chamber, several amendments to include more specific sections on accessibility were submitted. This led to the inclusion of sections about the promotion of accessibility of public spaces.¹³⁸ According to the added article 2.1.3 (s) Environment and Planning Bill, one of the purposes of the Bill is the promotion of accessibility for persons. article 2.28 of the Bill addresses the local environmental plans: if an environmental plan provides for new developments, it is required to promote the accessibility of that public outdoor space for persons with disabilities. According to the parliamentarians who submitted the amendment, administrative bodies must weigh the importance of the accessibility of public outdoor space against other interests involved. This consideration must be made, for example, when allocating functions to locations for new developments (construction of new residential areas and infrastructure) and also in restructuring. This consideration must also be made when, for example, laying down rules on the usability of public roads (such as the rules on shop displays, installing fences and parking bicycles) and performing tasks such as protecting the state and operation of roads.¹³⁹

In the accompanying future Decree on Quality of the Living Environment,¹⁴⁰ section 5.162 on accessibility of public space was introduced. The draft Decree contains instructions for provincial and municipal environmental plans. In these environmental plans, municipalities and provinces are required to take the promotion of accessibility for persons with disabilities into account. In the explanatory notes with this article, the government explains that ‘municipalities can consider the importance of accessibility with a view to an equal use of public space by everyone. For example, rules in the environmental plan about the layout can explicitly pay attention to accessibility for people in a wheelchair and people with, for example, visual impairments.’¹⁴¹ It instructs municipalities to apply the Integrated Accessibility Standard, ITS,¹⁴² as a reference for buildings and the direct environment.

It is worth to note that the text of the Bill and the Decree allow room for interpretation. Implementation is on a more or less voluntary basis. The instructions require public bodies to strive for accessibility rather than setting accessibility as a result oriented obligation.

Accompanying the Environment and Planning Bill, a National Strategy on Spatial Planning and the Environment has been drafted. The underlying principle of this long-term strategy is that interventions in the living environment must not take place in isolation, but in combination with other interventions. Accessibility is mentioned as one of the national interests and a parameter for the quality of life in towns and villages.¹⁴³ According to the document, the challenge is to improve the accessibility of buildings, public transport and public space (including emergency and emergency services) and to ensure the availability of sufficient suitable housing and housing for people with disabilities. Although the National Strategy will enter into force at same the time as the new Act, relevant authorities are already preparing rules and regulations for its enforcement.¹⁴⁴

A4.4 Structures for Stakeholder Involvement

Ratification CRPD

In the run-up to the ratification of CRPD, the government asked 42 organisations for their view on the draft bill. Of the invited organisations, 17 submitted their view on the draft. Among the organisations that replied, the NIHR¹⁴⁵ and the Electoral Council¹⁴⁶ submitted their advisory opinions. Both institutions did not refer to accessibility of public spaces.

The government also organised an online involvement for stakeholders. In most major new legislation operation, the input from civil society is sought through an online consultation process. Also in the case of the implementation legislation for CRPD, citizens and organizations were invited to give their view on the draft bill.¹⁴⁷ In total, 44 reactions were received, ranging from local DPOs to national organizations and individuals.

In the Memorandum of Explanation of the Bill, the views of the respondents were summarized.¹⁴⁸

Policy development

During the development of the National Action Plan Onbeperkt Meedoen!,¹⁴⁹ the government made the involvement of disabled people’s organisations in the decision making structure one of the essential elements. The national network of various organisations of persons with disabilities, the Alliance UN Convention on Disability,¹⁵⁰ is one of the institutional partners to co-decide on the various strands of action in the plan. Other civil society stakeholders are the VNO-NCW, The Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers¹⁵¹ and MKB Nederland, the Royal Association for SMEs in the Netherlands¹⁵² and the VNG, the national association of municipalities.¹⁵³

Monitoring

The independent monitoring role as described in article 33 CRPD was assigned to the NIHR. The Institute drafts an annual monitoring report and sends it to parliament. It chooses a different focal issue each year. In the 2017 report, accessibility was one of the focal issues. For the report, a survey was carried out among disabled people. Of the problems reported by the respondents, a quarter of the problems that they experienced had to do with inaccessible public space, including access to buildings.¹⁵⁴ In 2018, the first national State report was sent to the CRPD Committee.¹⁵⁵ In the same year, the NIHR made up its independent report including all sections of CRPD and submitted it to the Committee.¹⁵⁶ The report does not mention the accessibility of public space.

As described in chapter A4.1.2, the Alliance UN Convention on Disability has written a shadow report on the implementation of CRPD in the Netherlands.

A5 State or Provincial-Level Strategy, Law and Policy

Introduction

For the purposes of this report, the rules and policies of two provinces are described, Utrecht and Flevoland. They represent different aspects of the 12 provinces in the Netherlands. Utrecht is one of the oldest provinces in the country and has within its borders two larger cities, Utrecht and Amersfoort. It therefore has a significant urban character. Flevoland on the other hand has come into existence in the 1950s. It was formed on reclaimed land in the IJsselmeer, the former Zuiderzee. The province was formally established on 1 January 1986. With a vast amount of agricultural land, the province has predominantly rural characteristics.

The two cities where the field work for this study will be carried out, Utrecht and Almere, are located in these provinces. A connection can thus be made between provincial and municipal rules and regulations relating to inclusive public space.

With regards to designing, building, managing and maintenance of roads, the following applies. As described above under A1.1.2, provinces are the second tier of administration. They have the authority to design, build, manage and maintain roads within their geographical area. The legal basis of the Provincial authority to build roads is the general law, the Wet herverdeling wegenbeheer 1992 (‘Redistribution of Road Management Act 1992’).¹⁵⁷ The Act describes the division of responsibilities between the national government, the provinces and the municipalities in road construction. The Act also regulates the financial arrangements between these tiers of administration. As far as accessibility is concerned, there is no reference in the Act to pedestrians in general, nor to accessibility for persons with disabilities in particular.

A5.1 Utrecht

The province of Utrecht is situated in the centre of the country. It is the smallest province in the Netherlands and spans 1,449 km2. It consists of 26 municipalities and holds a joint population of 1,2 million. The provincial capital is the city of Utrecht.

In relation to road design, management and maintenance, the province counts 300 km of provincial roads. It is the task of the province to keep these roads in good and safe condition, including bicycle lanes and footpaths, roadsides, parking spaces, bus stops, (traffic) signs, traffic lights and road lighting. In addition, it is the province’s task to prevent dangerous situations in, on or around provincial roads. The rules and regulations relating to these tasks are summed up in the Province of Utrecht Road Ordinance 2010 (‘Wegenverordening provincie Utrecht 2010’).¹⁵⁸

The province also grants concessions for public transport services and is responsible for accessibility of bus and tram stops.

Equality and Inclusion

The Road Ordinance 2010 contains no sections which refer to equality, inclusion or accessibility for persons with disabilities. Possibly relevant for the accessibility of provincial roads is section 7 Road Ordinance. This section forbids anyone to keep trees, hedges and bushes along roads in such a condition that these obstruct the necessary clear view. This prohibition may be conducive in preventing and removing certain barriers that hinder the use of these streets for pedestrians with disabilities. Interestingly, the requirement refers to traffic safety, not to accessibility. Other prohibitions, such as a ban on littering or obstructing roads or footpaths, are not included.

Planning

The province of Utrecht has made no plans public for improving accessibility of roads and footpaths in the coming period.

The provincial plans for public transport are to continue with accessibility measures in bus and tram stops and buses and trams in the period to 2018.¹⁵⁹

Civil Society Engagement

There is no information available about the involvement of persons with disabilities or DPOs at the provincial level.

Noteworthy Issues or Concerns

On the basis of the previous section, it seems that accessibility of streets is not an issue for the province of Utrecht. In the current Road Ordinance, no reference to disability is made and no regulations regarding accessibility are included. It must be noted that, at the time of adopting the Ordinance in 2012, CRPD was not in force in The Netherlands. Therefore, a binding obligation to regulate the issue did not exist. On the other hand, public transport developments did take accessibility on board even before the ratification of the Convention. Requirements in the concession for buses and trams included conditions for accessibility. Adjustments of bus and tram stops were taken up in 2015 and onward.

A5.2 Flevoland

The province of Flevoland is home to 401,200 inhabitants. It consists of an area of 2,412 km2 of land. With a total of 6 municipalities, Flevoland is an open space with a straight layout of roads and waterways. Both in terms of size and population, Flevoland is the smallest province in the Netherlands. Lelystad is the provincial capital. The surface is mainly developed for agriculture: 89,000 hectares of large and efficiently designed plots. The total length of provincial roads is 618 km.

Equality and Inclusion

The design, management and maintenance of roads in Flevoland is regulated by the Environmental Ordinance 2019 (‘Omgevingsverordening 2019’).¹⁶⁰ The Ordinance contains no reference to accessibility for persons with disabilities. However, article 15.6 of the Ordinance contains a specific prohibition to block streets with goods or objects.¹⁶¹

Planning

Environmental Planning Programme Flevoland
In preparation for the entry into force of the Environment and Planning Act on 1 January 2021, Flevoland has developed an Environmental Planning Programme.¹⁶² It includes the currently compulsory plans: the environmental policy plan, the regional water plan and the traffic and transport plan.
The programme specifically aims at increasing the accessibility of public transport. The province will complete the accessibility of bus stops which started in 2015. The basic principle is that stops should be made accessible during reconstructions and major maintenance. The execution is the responsibility of the road authority. Transport information will be made suitable for travellers with disabilities, informs about the degree of accessibility of the trip and may offer support during the trip.¹⁶³
The Programme further aims at improving recreational accessibility of the existing natural reserves. The nature reserves should become attractive and provide a noteworthy experience for different target groups and should become accessible to everyone.¹⁶⁴

Civil Society Engagement

There is no information available about the engagement of persons with disabilities.

Noteworthy Issues or Concerns

For the province of Flevoland, accessibility of roads and streets has not been a topic of regulation. In the current Consolidated Environmental Ordinance 2019, no reference to disability is made. There is a section which prohibits the blocking of roads, which could be applied as a norm to enforce accessibility. In the area of public transport, the province has set rules and conditions for accessibility. Adjustments of bus and tram stops will be increased in the programme period.

A6 City-Level Strategy, Law and Policy

A6.1 Utrecht

The city of Utrecht has been a long term propagator of inclusion and accessibility for persons with disabilities. Already in 2007, the city adopted Agenda 22 as the leading policy document to raise awareness and to guide local policies.¹⁶⁵ Utrecht adopted the standards as a guide for practical implementation of inclusion standards.

In 2012, the city administration decided to adopt a policy document concerning the further implementation of Agenda 22.¹⁶⁶ Accessibility of public spaces was one of the policy areas.¹⁶⁷

With the ratification of CRPD by the Netherlands in 2016, the Convention became the point of reference for local policies in this field. In 2018, the new municipal executive adopted its coalition agreement ‘Utrecht: space for everyone’. One of the ambitions for the governing period 2018-2022 was to make the city more accessible and to adopt an inclusion agenda, intended to implement CRPD.¹⁶⁸ The executive pledged to make a flexible and quickly deployable budget available to address bottlenecks in physical and social accessibility and to stimulate private parties to invest in targeted improvements.

Equality and Inclusion

Utrecht has joined the Front Runners programme ‘Iedereen doet mee’(‘Everyone joins in’),¹⁶⁹ an initiative of the Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenten (VNG – ‘Association of Netherlands Municipalities’).¹⁷⁰ In the programme, more than 40 municipalities have committed themselves to implement CRPD at the local level and to improve participation and inclusion of citizens with disabilities. Participating municipalities create networks and exchange good practices in the area of inclusion. They create awareness, take measures in the field of education, leisure and develop a local inclusion agenda.

Utrecht has taken various measures, as described below. In order to increase awareness among citizens, a website was developed with general information about participation and accessibility.¹⁷¹

Buildings

In relation to the built environment, the city adopted a local accessibility standard, Utrecht Standaard Toegankelijk (‘Utrecht accessible by default’) in 2017.¹⁷² With a reference to CRPD, the city decided that everyone, regardless of disability, must be able to access all municipal buildings. The policy letter lists a number of objectives. These include that all spaces, routes and objects within the buildings are accessible to everyone; at the start of the building process, the future users decide if any spaces are not required to be accessible; routes and connections between spaces are will be displayed in a room matrix and route plan; during the construction process accessibility measures will be checked.

Public spaces

In cooperation with SOLGU, the local DPO, information about wheelchair accessible places was added to a worldwide online accessibility map, wheelmap.org.¹⁷³

For visitors, the City tourist department has developed a website with information about accessible recreational public spaces.¹⁷⁴

For the development of public spaces in the city, the municipality has taken accessibility for persons with disabilities as one of the core values.¹⁷⁵ This principle has been translated in the Manual Public Space. The Manual contains a framework for rules regarding management, organization and use of public space. All changes in public space, from large to small, must comply with the set framework. A municipal body, the BING committee, ensures that the various projects comply with the public space manual.¹⁷⁶ Every plan for (part of) the public space must be submitted to the BING committee before the preliminary design. The BING committee consists of representatives from various administrative departments in the field of safety, use and management. These include the police, the fire brigade and the administrators. The committee reviews the construction designs of various elements in public space, such as street elements, bridges, pavement and street furniture. The review looks at safety, uniformity, usability and accessibility. After approval by the Committee, the plan may be carried out. In view of inclusion, the Annex to the Manual is important. The Annex ‘Voetpaden voor iedereen’ (‘Footpaths for everyone’)¹⁷⁷ is a guideline which contains guiding principles for accessible footpaths and pavements for persons with various types of disabilities. It has details on street materials, places for dropped kerbs, the width of footpaths, street crossings and marking lines for the visual impaired. The guidelines are based on several existing criteria, including the ASVV recommendations¹⁷⁸ and the NEN 1814 standards.¹⁷⁹

The city of Utrecht has made the document Voetpaden voor Iedereen part of the reviewing process for the BING committee. New street designs are therefore tested against the accessibility norms included in the guidelines.

Municipal legislation

As will be explained in chapter D1.3, local government can make and implement municipal legislation.¹⁸⁰ The city of Utrecht has drafted the Algemene plaatselijke verordening (‘General Local Ordinance’ – APV). The APV addresses a broad range of issues, varying from public manifestations, street performances, cctv surveillance, football matches, drug abuse and measures against nuisance and wantonness, to care for the environment, street collections, prostitution zones and the sale of soft drugs.

With regard to the accessibility of streets, the APV includes a prohibition to place, apply, have or deposit objects or substances on, in or above the road without a permit. The Ordinance also prohibits the parking of bicycles, mopeds and similar vehicles if a pavement or footpath is obstructed.¹⁸¹ These provisions are suited for action to prevent and remove barriers in public spaces. For the enforcement of these provisions, local supervisors (BOAs) and police officers are mandated. Whether this is having a practical effect, requires further research in the field.

Planning

The principle of accessibility has been embraced in the municipal Framework Memorandum for the quality of public space, adopted in 2016.¹⁸² As a leading principle for planning, design and management, accessibility is treated at the same policy level as sustainability, climate resilience and healthy urbanization. The municipal executive aims at a careful design and management process when it comes to bridging differences in height, setting up obstacle-free zones and clear walking routes with marking or guidance. Where necessary and possible, it promises to take the interests of persons with a disability into account as equally as possible with the other development aspects in a design.

The policy programme ‘Utrecht voor iedereen toegankelijk’ (‘Utrecht Accessible for everyone’), adopted by the city council in 2019 is a local agenda with the implementation programme, is an elaboration of the Framework Memorandum from 2016.¹⁸³ According to the implementation programme, ‘public space is space that must be easily and freely accessible to everyone, including persons with disabilities. The municipality manages the public space and its task is to ensure that everyone can use it.

Making the city accessible appears to be a major challenge; improving all roads and pavements in the city is a long-term process.’¹⁸⁴

In addition to the package and in line with the pledge in the city coalition agreement, a subsidy programme was developed. Subsidies with a maximum of 20,000 € can be applied for. In 2020, the subsidy may cover the total costs for the measure; from 2021, the subsidy covers a maximum of 50% of the costs of the measure.¹⁸⁵ Measures, facilities or activities that contribute to more opportunities for citizens with disabilities to participate in society are eligible for the subsidy.

Civil Society Engagement

According to the policy programme Utrecht Accessible for everyone, the involvement of persons with disabilities and their organizations, is important. In the policy process, the local interest group of persons with disabilities, Solgu,¹⁸⁶ is an important collaborating partner. As one of the representative organisations of persons with disabilities in Utrecht, Solgu is consulted on many policy areas.

Noteworthy Issues or Concerns

The city of Utrecht has shown to be aware of issues relating to persons with disabilities. In most areas of municipal policies, the city executive addresses disability. Even before the ratification of CRPD, Utrecht had applied the principles of Agenda 22. There is a collaboration with the local disabled people’s organisation, SOLGU. The city has introduced a helpline, where people can report situations of inaccessibility. However, as the city website itself declares, accessibility is still not achieved all over the town and requires continuous attention.

A6.2 Almere

The city of Almere has been built on reclaimed land from the IJsselmeer. Building of the city started in 1976, when the first houses were constructed. The objective is to expand the city towards 350.000 inhabitants in 2030, when it will be the fifth largest city in the Netherlands. Several new urban districts are being developed. In its social policy, the municipality of Almere strives towards active citizenship, strengthening self-empowerment in society, and seeking connections between residents and organizations in the neighbourhoods.

Equality and Inclusion

In the municipal social policy agenda of 2014, the situation of persons with disabilities is explicitly mentioned.¹⁸⁷ Under the flag of ‘The Inclusive City’, the increase of participation is one of the objectives. The role of the municipality is driven by the decentralisation of social support legislation in 2015.¹⁸⁸ One of the city’s policy objectives is the enhanced accessibility of public space. Almere’s mobility policy includes measures for safe and pleasant use of public space for pedestrians, including persons with disabilities.¹⁸⁹ The aim is to create a division between spaces for fast traffic, cars and buses and slow traffic, cyclists and pedestrians. However, the policy plan does not contain concrete measures aimed at persons with disabilities. The current policy document on management of public space¹⁹⁰ focuses on sustainably maintaining and improving the functionality of the public space. It does not contain any reference to accessibility for persons with disabilities. The policy document relating to construction activities does refer to pedestrian access to public space. One of the requirements for builders is to keep pedestrian zones free from objects and obstacles, in order to guarantee safety and accessibility for pedestrians, including wheelchair users.¹⁹¹

In 2017, a working group of citizens, ViP (VN-verdrag in de Praktijk, ‘UN Convention in Practice’) drafted a local inclusion agenda. The advice of the group was embraced by the city council and was fully included in the development of the municipal policy framework.¹⁹²

Policy measures to increase accessibility of public spaces are included in the inclusion agenda. They envisage enforcement of the prohibition of parking bicycles in the city centre, improved safety of street crossings in the city centre. Other policy intentions are aimed at including accessibility norms in the local infrastructure manual and increased accessibility for wheelchair users at public events.¹⁹³

Municipal legislation

The Almere General Local Ordinance 2011 addresses the usability of roads and streets. According to the Ordinance, it is prohibited to use a public place for another purpose than in accordance with its public function. Putting objects or materials on a public street is forbidden if it jeopardizes the accessibility of the road or its efficient and safe use and if it causes nuisance or danger for the users of a property adjacent to the road.¹⁹⁴ A separate article prohibits parking of bicycles and mopeds in places where they may block an entrance or hinder the passage on a pavement or footpath.¹⁹⁵ This ordinance allows local enforcement officers to act in cases where pavements or other pedestrian areas are blocked or when the passage is hampered.

Planning

In 2017, the local planning document, the Environmental Vision, was adopted.¹⁹⁶ The policy document stimulates the necessary and desired developments in Almere and guarantees the quality of the living environment. It offers a framework of spatial developments for the near future, until a new vision is developed. According to the document, the philosophy behind the environmental vision is based on two principles. Firstly, the vision offers room for spontaneous and organic developments in the city by giving space to plans, projects and initiatives that are developed everywhere in the city. Secondly, the city increases its adaptability by not relying on blueprints or established programs. Where persons with disabilities are concerned, the city aims at providing sufficient and adequate housing with the aim that people can stay at their own home. The needs of persons with disabilities can result in specific requirements in the ongoing urban development. With reference to older people, the document envisages measures to make public space accessible for the elderly.¹⁹⁷ According to the document, giving substance to an inclusive society in which health and accessibility are important pillars. However, plans for mobility revolve around cars, public transport and cycling. Pedestrians and specific developments for accessibility are not referred to.¹⁹⁸ After the adoption of the Almere inclusion agenda, more specific attention for accessibility of public space has been created.

Civil Society Engagement

As described above, in 2017, ViP, a working group of persons with disabilities developed the local inclusion agenda, ‘Foreseeing what it takes. Policy framework social domain 2019-2022’.¹⁹⁹ The working group exists of persons with disabilities and their organisations, their relatives and a number of local public interest organisations.²⁰⁰ The development of the inclusion agenda was supported by Disabilities Studies in Nederland (DSiN).²⁰¹ The document was adopted by the municipal government as the official policy document on inclusion and the implementation of CRPD.

Noteworthy Issues or Concerns

The city of Almere has a number of policies regarding persons with disabilities. The city’s inclusion agenda, written in cooperation with a DPO, contains policy objectives and measures to improve the accessibility of public space. It seems, however, that not all policy intentions have been translated into practical measures yet.

B Laws that can be used only by or on behalf of pedestrians with specific characteristics

B1 Possible Discrimination Actions

Non-discrimination laws in the Netherlands are not applicable to issues relating to accessibility of pedestrian public space. Actions against inaccessible streets by or on behalf of pedestrian with specific characteristics cannot be based on the equal treatment acts or the criminal code. See chapter A4.1 for more details.

B2 Other Equality-Based Actions

Persons with disabilities can report complaints about equality or non-discrimination issues at a municipal anti-discrimination agency (see A4.1).²⁰² The agency will consider the complaint and may take action in support of the complainant. In cases of inaccessible pedestrian areas, the agency may contact the responsible authority and ask for a solution, such as the removal of the obstacle.

B4 Noteworthy project-related observations and concerns

As observed, equal treatment legislation is not applicable in cases relating to inaccessible streets. With the introduction of the equality laws, the Netherlands have chosen to limit the scope of the law to legal relations between (contracting) parties. As pointed out in chapter A4.1, the government claims that it cannot discriminate. It refers to the prohibition of discrimination and the equality principle enshrined in article 1 of the Constitution. Unilateral government actions, such as the decision to design a street in a certain manner, can be tested against the General Administrative Law Act or public tort connected with a breach of statutory duty in the Civil Code.

C Laws that can be used by pedestrians generally or by NGOs on behalf of pedestrians generally

C1 Failing to safeguard pedestrians from holes, roadworks, traffic flow and other hazards

Introduction

In general, the owner or manager of a public road should take measures to prevent road users from damages. According to this precautionary principle, the government in its role of owner or manager of roads, including footpaths, has an obligation to take measures to prevent fatalities, injuries and other damage. In that capacity, public bodies may not expose others to a greater risk than is reasonably justified under the circumstances. Risks may be uncertain or may be known. In cases where an uncertain risk may arise, the public body should act with appropriate precaution. If it fails to do so, it may be liable for damages. Where a known risk is created, the public body should exercise care, such as putting up warning signs or carry out repair or other works to redress the dangerous situation. Finally, it should perform the required aftercare if a risk has already materialized. This concerns the care that can be expected from a reasonably acting person in similar circumstances. It requires the public body to prevent further damage.²⁰³

Anyone who finds that a certain hazard or risk prevents them from using the pavement or footpath in the way it is meant to be used, may enter into legal proceedings to redress the situation and demand the responsible authority to remove the hazard. Pedestrians have this opportunity in case they have an interest for themselves.

Legal standing for NGOs

Under Dutch civil law, NGOs have a legal standing if they bring forward the interests of a group of persons they represent. Article 3:305a Civil Code grants legal standing for collective action.

Any organisation that institutes collective action should conduct the proceedings in its own name and not as a legal representative of or on behalf of others. An interest group must meet three requirements in order to be able to institute collective action: it must be a foundation or an association with full legal capacity; it must have an adequate statutory purpose description and the interests for which the interest group stands up must also be similar in order to lend themselves for collective action. It is not necessary to represent the interests of a clearly defined group.²⁰⁴ An interest group is not admissible, if in the given circumstances has insufficiently attempted to reach an agreement with the defendant.

Prevention and damages

Two situations may be discerned: provisions to address the prevention of hazards and provisions for the redress and compensation in cases where damages were sustained.

For both situations, the Dutch Civil Code is the applicable law for pedestrians who want to redress hazardous situations.

Legal developments in preventive action have been slow and have not delivered a large body of literature or case law.

In cases where damage was sustained, the Civil Code addresses the rights and obligations relating to compensation of damages under the tort provisions. There is a large and long standing body of case law relating to tort. For the purposes of this report, the legal theory and the most relevant cases will be briefly described.

Prevention

A claim for damage prevention can be effected through article 3:296 Civil Code. This article stipulates that a person who is obliged to give, do or omit to give something to another, is sentenced to that end by the court, at the request of the entitled person, unless by law, by the nature of the obligation or by a legal act otherwise follows. Article 3:296 of the Dutch Civil Code therefore could provide the legal basis for the obligation to prevent damage.

An example is the case of serious nuisance from pile driving in the city of Eindhoven. With a permit of the municipality, a building company undertook works of pile driving for the construction of a new apartment building. The heavy sounds of the work caused nuisance for neighbouring houses. A number of residents of the area submitted a civil claim at the district court for a preliminary injunction for the builder to stop the work, until a more silent way to carry out the work was found. They based their claim on article 3:396 Civil Code. The court found that the disturbance might be classified as tort. However, it declined to order a prohibition of the works, because of to the presence of compelling social interest in terms of housing construction and that measures had been taken to limit the nuisance as much as possible.²⁰⁵

The obligation based on article 3:296 Civil Code, to prevent a situation from becoming hazardous, does not include the introduction of new legislation by the State.²⁰⁶

So far, no case law is known in which individuals or NGOs have invoked this article to prevent hazardous situations in relation to pedestrians. This may be due to the fact that a civil procedure is lengthy and costly. Lengthy in the sense that a civil case generally lasts around 60 weeks.²⁰⁷ Costly, in the sense that often there is mandatory legal representation by an advocate. For persons with a low income,²⁰⁸ a legal aid scheme exists. Those eligible for the scheme are required to pay a contribution between 203 € and 853 € per case to engage a lawyer.²⁰⁹

Damages

In cases of safeguarding pedestrians from obstacles, damaged roads and other hazards, the provisions of the Civil Code are important sources of law. The main two provisions are the liability of the proprietor of a road or building, Book 6 article 174 Civil Code and the general tort provision, Book 6 article 162 Civil Code.

C1.1 Civil Code, Book 6 article 174.

C1.1.1 Description and Examples

The section of the Civil Code codifies the liability for damages as a result of failure to prevent users from danger. The full text of article 6:174 Civil Code reads: The owner of a premises that does not meet the requirements that may be expected from it in the given circumstances, and thereby poses a danger to persons or property, is liable, when this danger arises, unless liability pursuant to the previous section would have been missing had he known this danger at the time of its creation. In these cases, a risk liability exists for the proprietor of a street or pedestrian area. Culpability does not need to be established.

The liability of a public body based on article 6:174 Civil Code has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands (SC) in several cases. From the reasoning of the SC in these cases, it can be concluded that as a general principle, everyone should be attentive and careful to avoid accidents. However, some situations are so dangerous that certain safety measures must be taken to prevent that danger from being realized. If such measures are not taken in such a situation, this may go against the care that is appropriate in society with regard to another person or good, and therefore unlawful.²¹⁰ Whether in a specific case there is a conflict with this social responsibility depends on the circumstances of the case. This could include the following questions: how likely is it that a person will not observe the required alertness and prudence, how likely is this non-observance to cause an accident, and what is the expected severity of the accident? And what are the consequences of such an accident and, finally, how inconvenient it is to take appropriate safety measures?

A generally accepted doctrine is the obligation to limit damage. This requires that an injured party who suffers damage from another person must not sit still, but has to limit the damage as much as possible. If the injured party does not do this, he will not be fully compensated for his damage. This is the content of the Civil Code in article 6:101.²¹¹

The Dutch Supreme Court has adjudicated a number of cases relating to liability of public bodies for damages as a result of negligence in design or maintenance. These judgments illustrate the criteria described above. Two specific cases are presented here.

Case 1: Liability of a Water Board for damages (Peat Dike Wilnis).

As a result of the shifting of a large canal quay, a regional flood defence broke and a vast area of land was flooded. Houses and private property were damaged and the municipality of Wilnis incurred a large amount of costs for the repair of the damaged houses, roads and agricultural fields. The municipality tried to claim the damages from the Water Board, stating that the damage occurred as a result of overdue maintenance. The court procedure led to a judgment of the Supreme Court.

The SC attributed the following criteria to the question about liability of a public body:

Para 4.4.3 “the question of whether the condition is defective depends on various circumstances, including the nature of the construction (for example, a building or work that is open to the public or a closed house or work on enclosed grounds), the function of the construction, the physical condition of the construction at the time of the realization of the danger and the expected use of the construction by third parties. Furthermore, the magnitude of the probability of realizing the danger associated with the construction should be taken into account, as well as the possibility and objection of security measures to be taken. In the event that liability rests with a public body, this can also be attributed to the freedom of policy and the available financial resources.” ²¹²

Case 2: Liability of a municipality for a fallen cyclist.

A cyclist is overtaken by a lorry on a small road. He needs to veer to the roadside on the right to let the lorry pass. The front wheel of the bicycle gets into a gap between the road and the grass pavers, which has a width of 3 to 6 cm and a depth of 7 to 8 cm over a length of hundreds of meters. The cyclist loses his balance and falls on the road, just in front of the right-hand front wheels of the trailer. As a result, he sustains injuries and incurs medical costs. In the appeal in cassation procedure, the Supreme Court considers the liability of a municipality for the gap in the road surface and refers to the criteria it developed in the Peat Dike Wilnis judgment.²¹³ The SC considered that the municipality should have investigated whether the roadside offers a safe option for diversion for road users. The municipality’s general reference to a lack of resources to carry out overall road inspection and maintenance was rejected on the grounds that it lacked specificity. The SC refers the case to a court of appeal to adjudicate the amount of damages.

C1.1.2 Remedies, Sanctions or Other Outcomes

The sanctions in civil liability cases consist of a compensation for the damages.

C1.1.3 Enforcement

When a pedestrian suffers damages as a result of street design, maintenance of management that does not meet the requirements, he has the opportunity to hold the proprietor of the street liable for the damages. The person who has suffered damages can start legal proceedings at a civil court.

C1.2 Civil Code article 6-162

C1.2.1 Description and Examples

General tort provision.

In accordance with the Civil Code, every person owes a general duty of care against other persons in societal relations. If this care is not applied, and a person sustains damage as a result of this negligence, the perpetrator is liable for the damages. This duty of care applies to public bodies, analogous to the duty for private persons. The Civil Code or any other statute does not differentiate between private and public duty bearers. As a result, case law interpretation of the civil code applies to public bodies as well.

Article 6:162 Civil Code, Tort, reads:
1. He who commits a tortious act against another person that can be attributed to him, must compensate the damage that this other person has suffered as a result thereof.
2. A tortious act is regarded to be a violation of someone else’s right and an act or omission in violation of a duty imposed by law or of what according to unwritten law has to be regarded as proper social conduct, always as far as there is no justification for this behaviour.
3. A tortious act can be attributed to the perpetrator if it results from his fault or from a cause for which he is accountable by virtue of law or generally accepted principles.

In the landmark Basement Latch (‘Kelderluik’) case from 1965, the Supreme Court formulated criteria to determine whether there is tort and a liability for damages for a private company.²¹⁴ The case concerned a delivery man who delivered crates of fizzy drinks to a bar in Amsterdam. The entrance to the stock basement was through a latch in the floor, which was located on the way to the bar’s toilets. While leaving to collect used bottles in the bar, the delivery man left the latch open. A customer, on his way to the toilet, fell through the open latch into the basement and sustained injuries. He sued the delivery man and the delivery company. The procedure ended at the Supreme Court. The court formulated four criteria to establish tort:

How likely is it that someone is so inattentive and careless that the potential danger is not noticed? What is the chance that accidents will result from this? How serious can the consequences be? How difficult is it to take adequate security measures? In the considerations of the case, the company was found to have acted negligent and was partly liable for the damages. The customer himself was liable for contributory negligence. The damages for the delivery company were reduced to 50%.

The considerations of the Supreme Court are still valid and count as guidelines for lower courts.

A public authority owes a general duty of care to pedestrians, road users and the community at large. The duty arises in the same way it does for private individuals, through the incremental, analogical approach, rather than statute. But if they do not owe a particular duty of care to the claimant, then their failure to take reasonable care and safeguard pedestrians cannot give rise to liability in negligence.

The body responsible for a site that is accessible to the public has a duty of warning to the public if there is an unobservable and unknown danger to the public that the authority is aware of. However, it is only in the light of the circumstances of the case that it can be assessed whether and to what extent it may be required to take into account the possibility that vigilance and prudence will not be exercised and to take certain security measures to that end.²¹⁵

A case to illustrate this is the ‘Jet blast’ case.²¹⁶ The runway of airport of the Dutch Caribbean island of Sint Maarten lies right next to a small beach. The beach is known among tourists, some of whom stand at the beach during the take-off of an aircraft, which passes over at 10 meters. The powerful jet blast the aircraft produces, causes excitement and danger. A tourist who is standing on the road between the airport and the beach is propelled in the air by the jet blast and is thrown on some rocks off the beach. She sustains injuries and sues the airport authority, a private company, for damages. According to the airport authority, the beach is not part of the airport and therefore it cannot take responsibility for the behaviour of visitors. Besides, the fence that forms the boundary between the grounds of the airport and the Beach has been provided with at least one sign with the drawing of an airplane taking off and in addition the text “Warning!” in capital letters, with the caption “Low flying and departing aircraft blast can cause physical injury”. The airport argued that by placing warning signs and putting up a fence that prevents people from entering the runway, it did what it could do in this regard. In appeal in cassation, the Dutch Supreme Court²¹⁷ considers that ‘for the answer to the question if a warning can be regarded as an adequate measure to protect against a particular hazard, is decisive if it can be expected that this warning will lead to an act or omission that avoids this hazard.’ It refers the case back to the appeal court for a new decision with these considerations as a guideline.

In conclusion, it can be said that a public authority is required to assess a certain situation that may be hazardous, and take adequate measures to prevent accidents or damage. In cases that not enough measures are taken, such as redressing the situation or adequately warn the public for impending danger, the public authority is liable for damages and compensation on the basis of tort.

C1.2.2 Remedies, Sanctions or Other Outcomes

The sanctions in tort cases consist of a compensation for the damages.

C1.2.3 Enforcement

The person who has suffered damages can start legal proceedings at a civil court.

C2 Inaccessible or unsafe design of streets or street features

C2.1 Spatial Planning Act

C2.1.1 Description and Examples

Also see chapter A4.3.

A local land-use or zoning plan (‘bestemmingsplan’) determines the destination of a certain area, including streets. On the basis of the destination (e.g. housing, industry, recreation or traffic), the design is being made. The municipality adopts the zoning plan.

The underlying law, the Spatial Planning Act, addresses the procedure for the coming into force of the zoning plan.²¹⁸ The municipality publishes a draft zoning plan. Within six weeks after publication, any interested party, who wants to object to the plan, may submit their view to the municipal council. Within 12 weeks, the municipal council is required to adopt the final version of the zoning plan. This decision to adopt the plan is an appealable decision. Anyone who does not agree with the decision, for example on grounds that the design does not take accessibility into account, can file an appeal at the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State.²¹⁹ A prerequisite is that appeals are only admissible from parties who had submitted their view in the initial phase.

With the coming into force of the zoning plan, the next phase is the designing and construction of streets and public spaces. This is a highly technical exercise and comprises guidelines on kerb heights, angles of corners, street and pavement width, types of parking space et cetera. For this purpose, many municipalities follow the guidelines developed by the consulting platform CROW.²²⁰ The document that contains the actual design is an administrative decision of the municipality, and it can therefore be appealed.

Municipalities have a wide margin of appreciation to set rules and regulations for design and construction and to develop procedures. In the context of this report, an overview of all 400+ municipal regulations cannot be given. Therefore, two examples will be briefly discussed below: Utrecht and Almere.

Municipal building ordinance Utrecht

The local municipal building ordinance has no sections referring to accessibility. It contains a section relating to the duties during construction, which allows the municipality to set rules to prevent risks to the environment. This may be used to prevent blocking streets and pavements during construction works. It is not known if this provision is used for that purpose.²²¹ The municipality applies the Handbook Footpaths for Everyone (see chapter A6.1) for the design of pavements and pedestrian areas.

Municipal building ordinance Almere

The Almere municipal building ordinance contains no sections relating to accessibility of buildings or access paths or the prevention of blocking streets.²²²

C2.1.2 Remedies, Sanctions or Other Outcomes

Cases of non-compliance to the zoning plan by the municipality do not carry sanctions. If, on appeal, the administrative court finds that the zoning plan needs to be revised, the municipality will change the plan and carry it out in accordance with the judgment.

C2.1.3 Enforcement

See above under (a).

C3 Obstructing roads or pavements

C3.1 General Municipal Ordinance (APV)

C3.1.1 Description and Examples

Most municipal APVs include a prohibition of blocking streets and pedestrian areas. Chapter 2 of the Model Ordinance of the VNG contains two types of prohibition. The first type is a general rule with possibility of exemption and the second type is the duty to apply for a permit. In both situations, it is forbidden to use the road or a road section other than according to its public function, if that use inflicts damage to the road or impedes the usability of the road.²²³ Municipalities are under no obligation to follow the Model Ordinance, but most municipalities do use the model in their version. For a description of how the two cities under research, Utrecht and Almere, have arranged this, see Chapter A6.1 and A6.2.

C3.1.2 Remedies, Sanctions or Other Outcomes

A violation of the APV carries a fine of 4,350 € or a maximum imprisonment of three months.

C3.1.3 Enforcement

In cases where pedestrian areas are blocked or obstructed by others, resulting in inaccessibility, a person may request the responsible authorities to enforce traffic laws or other relevant regulations, such as the APV. In case the authority adheres and removes the obstacle, the issue is solved. In case where an authority refuses to apply enforcement measures, the General Administrative Law Act gives the possibility to initiate legal action. A decision not to apply enforcement is regarded as an administrative law decision.²²⁴ This decision may be appealed by an interested party, first through the preliminary procedure of submitting an objection at the responsible authority. The aim of this procedure is to allow the individual to explain why he or she disagrees with the decision, after which the authority may reconsider its decision.

When the objection is rejected, in second instance the complainant may appeal the decision at the administrative section of the regional court. In case of a negative verdict, the judgment may be appealed at the highest administrative court, the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State (ABRvS).

C3.2 Wegenverkeerswet 1994 (Road Traffic Act 1994)

C3.2.1 Description and Examples

The Road Traffic Act 1994 addresses, amongst others, behaviour of road users. The specific provision in the Act, article 5 Road Traffic Act, forbids anyone to behave in such a way that danger is or can be caused on the road or that traffic on the road is hindered or can be hindered. A specific section addresses pedestrians with disabilities. Article 49 Road Traffic Act requires drivers to give priority to pedestrians carrying a white cane and to other persons with disabilities.
In 2019, a new section 5A in the Act was introduced, aimed at forbidding dangerous traffic behaviour with potential serious consequences.²²⁵

C3.2.2 Remedies, Sanctions or Other Outcomes

Violation of the traffic laws is a punishable offence. Violations of article 5 and 5A Road Traffic Act are punishable with imprisonment or a fine.²²⁶ For the relatively minor offences of article 5, imprisonment of up to 6 months or a fine of up to € 8,700 is possible, for the more serious crime of article 5A Road Traffic Act, the maximum sentence is 2 years imprisonment or a fine of € 21,750.²²⁷

C3.2.3 Enforcement

Enforcement is possible through intervention of the police. When police officers find an offence, they may make a report and start prosecution.

An example is the following case of the Appeal court Arnhem/Leeuwarden of 4 February 2019:²²⁸ In the case, a car was parked on the pavement in front of a private exit. A police officer fined the driver, who contested the decision in the regional court of first instance.

The police officer’s report contains the following statement:

“I saw this car on the pavement and in front of a garage exit. The owner of the car in the garage wanted to leave, but was hindered by this car that blocked the road.

I saw that this car was a major nuisance to pedestrians. I saw that pedestrians had to walk down the street. It was a Saturday, so it was crowded. As many as 20 people walked by using the pavement. I also saw disabled people who could not pass. This caused great inconvenience.”

The regional court found the driver guilty of violating article 5 Road Traffic Act and imposed a fine. In the appeal procedure, the driver complained that the police officer should have applied the more specific traffic regulation of forbidden to park in front of an exit. The court of appeal rejected the claim, stating that in this case, the police officer had been free to apply the more general article 5 Road Traffic Act.

C3.3 Reglement verkeersregels en verkeerstekens 1990

C3.3.1 Description and Examples

The RVV²²⁹ is the main regulation containing traffic rules and road signs. It is the implementing regulation based on Articles 2 and 12 Road Traffic Act. The Regulation prescribes the place on the road for all road users, including pedestrians. For example, article 4 RVV requires pedestrians to use the pavement or footpath, article 5 RVV requires cyclists to use the cycle path and article 7 RVV allows users of a vehicle for the disabled to use the pavement, the cycle path or the road. Article 2 para 1 RVV 1990 states that the rules of this decree concerning pedestrians also apply to drivers of a vehicle for the disabled if they use a footpath or pavement or cross from one footpath or pavement to another.

Article 10 RVV requires road users to park their vehicle anywhere but on a pavement or footpath. This article is intended to prevent vehicles from blocking the pavement.

C3.3.2 Remedies, Sanctions or Other Outcomes

Sanctions on violating the provisions of the RVV 1990 are criminal offences.²³⁰ The punishment differs between a fine or the withdrawal of the driver’s licence.

C3.3.3 Enforcement

Police are empowered to enforce the Decree and to prosecute perpetrators.

C4 Driving, cycling and other travelling on roads which might endanger pedestrians

C4.1 Wegenverkeerswet 1994 (Road Traffic Act 1994)

See C3.2.

C4.2 Reglement verkeersregels en verkeerstekens 1990 (RVV 1990) (Regulation Traffic rules and road signs 1990)

See C3.3.

C5 Cycling, scootering and other travelling on pavements which might endanger pedestrians

C5.1 RVV 1990

C5.1.1 Description and Examples

See Chapter C3.3.

The articles 5 and 6 RVV 1990 require all road users to use the road section allocated to them.²³¹ This indicates that using a road section which they are not supposed to use, is a traffic violation. That implies that any cyclist, who is cycling on a pedestrian area, is liable for a traffic fine.

C5.1.2 Remedies, Sanctions or Other Outcomes

Traffic violations carry a fine or an imprisonment. Users of a scooter may lose their scooter licence as a punishment.²³²

C5.1.3 Enforcement

The police is mandated to enforce traffic regulations in the RVV 1990.

C7 Noteworthy project-related observations and concerns

The Dutch Civil Code offers various possibilities to prevent and redress damages as a result of inaccessible streets. Prevention (art. 3:296 Civil Code) does not seem to be applied at all-in these cases; redress when damages have occurred are more common and offer opportunities to victims to receive financial compensation. There is a body of case law relating to liability of a public body in cases of negligent lack of maintenance.

Problem is that victims need to start legal proceedings, which are often costly, many will refrain from starting a legal case. As a result, little case law in this particular area will develop and a picture of what persons with disabilities come across, will not be established.

As far as planning and construction law is concerned, both the existing and forthcoming legislation, the Spatial Planning Act and the Environmental Planning Act do not contain clear and enforceable rules for accessible building. It is left to the local administration to set rules and enforce accessibility in het public space.

Local legislation in the shape of APVs does contain enforceable rules in the area of blocking and obstructing roads and pavements. However, in many cases these rules are not specified for accessibility for disabled people and as a result, they are not part of an all-encompassing policy for accessibility. There are some exceptions that may be regarded as good practices, such as the introduction of a helpline for obstructed streets and pavements in Utrecht.

Traffic laws do not refer to the position of disabled people as road users and do not contain specific protective measures. However, enforcement of traffic regulations regarding obstruction of pavements gives good opportunities for accessibility. The actual enforcement by police needs to be further examined.

D Laws that can be used by public bodies to challenge problems for pedestrians generally

D1 Failing to safeguard pedestrians from holes, roadworks, traffic flow and other hazards

Introduction

Laws and regulations exist that regulate the general accessibility of roads. In this context, the term ‘roads’ includes footpaths and pavements.²³³ Drafting and enforcement of laws and regulations relating to obstruction of pavements and footpaths is the shared responsibility of the national, provincial and the municipal authorities.

Enforcement

Administrative law

In far as enforcement is concerned, national, provincial and municipal laws grant supervisory powers to certain supervisory officials to enforce regulations. They may enter places, demand information and inspection of documents, take samples and search for means of transport. This enforcement supervision, also known as control, is governed by administrative law. The general rules are included in Title 5.2 of the General Administrative Law Act (‘Algemene wet bestuursrecht’).

Supervision takes place at a stage where there is not (yet) a reasonable suspicion that a criminal offence has been committed. This is different in criminal law. In principle, there must be a presumption that an offence has been committed in order to begin investigations.

Chapter 5 of the General Administrative Law Act contains a list of the coercive instruments that can be applied by the administrative body and the rules that must be observed when applying the coercive instruments.

The implementation and enforcement of, in particular, special legislation and regulations of provinces and municipalities has been entrusted to a variety of public law organizations. If necessary, employees of such an organization can be granted investigative powers; they are named buitengewoon opsporingsambtenaar (‘extraordinary investigating officer’) or BOA. BOAs have a title of investigative power, the required competence and reliability, and a deed of swearing in. Their powers are granted by the Minister of Justice and Security under the Code of Criminal Procedure.²³⁴ On the instructions of the Minister, a BOA can use force or apply restrictive measures on a person. The BOA can be authorized to conduct a security search, a transport search and a containment search. As a rule, the BOA has limited investigative powers related to its function and job description. The BOA is deployed where enforcement by the police is not desirable, because of prioritization, or is not possible due to insufficient expertise or capacity at the police.

BOAs may operate in several domains. In the context of this report, the domain Public Space is the most relevant. BOAs may act on violations that affect the quality of life on facts can be regarded as nuisance, degeneration, minor annoyance. They are empowered to act during surveillance, by being present on the street in the neighbourhood. Violations they can act upon can be ascertained directly by their own observation. (c) Enforcement of article 5 Road Traffic Act and the Spatial Planning Act are explicit parts of their operational domain.²³⁵

Criminal law

Under article 2 of the Police Act 1993, the police have the duty to ensure effective enforcement of the legal order and to provide assistance to those in need. On the basis of this general police task, as well as on the basis of the charge given to the officials mentioned there in Articles 141 and 142 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to investigate criminal offences, police officers can investigate alleged violations of the law.

D1.1 National legislation

The majority of roads under management of the central government are national highways. Pedestrians are prohibited from using these, except under certain strict circumstances, such as in cases of emergency. For example, a car accident where a driver and passengers need to leave their vehicle. In the context of this report, highway rules and regulations are omitted.

Some minor roads are under government management. For rules regarding pedestrians, the rules and regulations of the Roads Act and Road Traffic Act²³⁶ apply.

D1.2 Provincial Legislation

D1.2.1 Description and Examples

Provincial Road Ordinance

Each province is required to maintain an Environmental or Roads Ordinance, in which road safety is regulated. Included in road safety is the safety and usability of roads by pedestrians. Provinces have a large degree of liberty to set up their provincial ordinance, as long as it follows the statutory requirements of the Roads Act and Road Traffic Act.

As elaborated in chapter A5, the provinces of Utrecht and Flevoland have included a prohibition to obstruct roads.

D1.2.2 Remedies, Sanctions and Other Outcomes

A violation of the Ordinance carries a maximum fine of 4,350€ or an imprisonment of three months.

D1.2.3 Enforcement

The enforcement of provincial road legislation is entrusted to supervisors (‘toezichthouders’) and BOAs.²³⁷ Supervisors, who derive their powers from article 122 Provinces Act, have the authority to act in cases of a violation of the provincial regulations and apply administrative sanctions. They may require a perpetrator to remove an obstacle from the road or, if in case of a criminal offence, to report it to the police.

The police is authorized to act in cases when a violation of a provincial regulation is a criminal offence.

D1.3 Municipal legislation

General Municipal Ordinance (APV)

D1.3.1 Description and Examples

As stated above in chapter C3.1, municipalities have a wide margin of discretion to regulate activities that may compromise road safety. Each municipality may establish its own General Municipal Ordinance (Algemene Plaatselijke Verordening, APV). The National Association of Municipalities (VNG)²³⁸ has developed a model APV, which is adjusted regularly. The VNG Model APV is often used as document of reference, but there is no obligation for individual municipalities to follow or implement the model.

In relation to possibilities for municipal enforcement officers, article 2.10 of the Model APV carries a prohibition to use a road for other purposes than for which it is intended. This includes the prohibition to hinder or impede the usability of the road. The usability of the road is impeded if a free passage of a certain number of meters is not kept free on footpaths. In the Model APV, further rules for terraces, displays and billboards are included.²³⁹ The two cities under scrutiny in this report, Utrecht and Almere, have similar sections incorporated in their APV.²⁴⁰

D1.3.2 Remedies, Sanctions and Other Outcomes

Violations of the APVs in both Utrecht and Almere carry a maximum sanction of a fine of 4,350€ or an imprisonment of three months.²⁴¹

D1.3.3 Enforcement

The enforcement of provincial road legislation is entrusted to ²⁴²BOAs.²⁴³ They may require a perpetrator to remove an obstacle from the road or, if in case of a criminal offence, to report it to the police.

The police may act in cases where a violation of a local regulation is a criminal offence.

D2 Inaccessible or unsafe design of streets or street features

D2.1 Spatial Planning Act

D2.1.1 Description and Examples

The issue of public bodies that may want to act against inaccessible or unsafe design of streets or street features lies within the area of inter-administrative supervision. Street design is the responsibility of an the central government, the province or, in most cases, the municipality. If either of these authorities fail in designing accessible streets, a supervisory authority may need to act. In the Netherlands, a system of inter-administrative supervision is in place. The central government is the supervisory body towards the province²⁴⁴ and the province towards the municipality.²⁴⁵

The power to intervene in municipal decisions is applied by provinces in many occasions; this despite the fact that the provinces are supposed to largely respect the municipal autonomy.²⁴⁶ Inter-administrative supervision is aimed at the performance of statutory co-government tasks. It is not intended to improve the quality of the task and intervention only takes place if legally established co-government tasks are not (correctly) performed or if decisions conflict with public interest or law. The process of intervention consists of four steps: collecting information, assessment, intervening where necessary and application of measures.

One of the areas where inter-administrative supervision takes place is spatial planning. In the event that e.g. a municipality adopts a certain measure in a zoning plan that is not in line with the provincial structural vision, or that is against the law, the Spatial Planning Act gives the province the power to intervene.²⁴⁷ The province may issue an instruction to the municipality, with the effect that the contested section is no longer part of the zoning plan. The same possibilities exist for the government towards the province.²⁴⁸

D2.1.2 Remedies, sanctions and other outcomes

The supervisory bodies (government and province) have two generic instruments with which it can intervene: nomination for suspension or annulment of decisions.²⁴⁹ The government can propose a decision of the province for suspension to the Crown, the highest authority in administrative matters. In other situations it can annul the measure in the zoning plan. The reason for intervention may be that the province takes a decision that is contrary to law or the public interest. The Crown can suspend or annul this decision. The same procedure is valid for provinces towards municipalities.

Substitution in case of neglect of tasks: if a municipality neglects a co-government task, the province can take over that task on the expenses of the municipality.

D3 Obstructing roads or pavements

See chapter D1.

D4 Driving, cycling and other travelling on roads which might endanger pedestrians

Introduction

Attention for road safety is generally regarded as important in the Netherlands, with the elderly as a specific group to pay attention to. In 2018, 8% or 54 of the road deaths in the Netherlands were pedestrians, 7% were riders of mobility scooters. Most road deaths, pedestrians and other road users (21%), involved people who were 80 years old or older, followed by the group aged between 70 and 80 years (19%). Proportionately, measured by population size, the number of road deaths among older people is high.²⁵⁰ As far as non-lethal traffic accidents are concerned, around 3,000 pedestrians visited an Emergency Room in a hospital in 2018, out of 123,000 ER visits in total.²⁵¹ The proportion of non-lethal accidents involving traffic has decreased over the last years, whereas unilateral accidents treated in an ER, a fall on the street without other traffic involved, increased to around 24,000 in 2017.²⁵²

A possible consequence of traffic and unilateral accidents, is that persons with or without disabilities may refrain from going out: fear of moving outdoors or ‘avoided mobility’.²⁵³

For the Dutch government, prevention of road traffic accidents is a policy priority. In the Road Safety Strategic Plan 2030, the ministry of Transport and Water Management aims to promote vulnerable road users to participate in traffic as long as possible. Pedestrian safety is promoted e.g. by the ‘Walkability Platform’, launched in 2019 (‘Platform Ruimte voor Lopen’).

Another measure is the introduction of 30 km/h zones in residential areas. In comparison with zones where the minimum speed of 50 km/h is the norm, lethal and non-lethal accidents are less frequent in 30 km/h zones. However, research shows that special measures in terms of road layout and enforcement are needed to optimize the effect of these zones. ²⁵⁴

Policy measures however, are insufficient to prevent or redress traffic situations that may endanger pedestrians. The Road Traffic Act and related laws and regulations are necessary for road safety.

D4.1 Wegenverkeerswet

The Wegenverkeerswet (‘Road Traffic Act’) is the law that holds the rules for road users. See chapter C3.2 for a description.

D5 Cycling, scootering and other travelling on pavements which might endanger pedestrians

D5.1 RVV 1990

See chapter C5.1

D6 Other issues relating to the design, management or maintenance of streets

D6.1 Besluit administratieve bepalingen inzake het wegverkeer

D6.1.1 Description and Examples

As a legal tool for road managers is the Besluit administratieve bepalingen inzake het wegverkeer (BABW) (‘Ordinance Administrative Provisions on Road Traffic’). The BABW is a set of rules addressing the placement of traffic signs: road signs, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings etc., and other traffic measures such as the positioning of traffic regulators.²⁵⁵

D6.1.2 Remedies, Sanctions and Other Outcomes

A violation of certain sections of the Ordinance is defined as a criminal offence. Specifically, it is a punishable offence to remove traffic signs and to put up road signs or objects that may confuse road users.²⁵⁶

D6.1.3 Enforcement

Enforcement of violations of the Ordinance is carried out by the police.

D7 Noteworthy project-related observations and concerns

With regard to the role of public bodies in preventing and redressing inaccessible public spaces, the following may be noted. Legislation relating to manage blocked pavements and other pedestrian areas exists. To a large extent, local, provincial and national authorities can apply and enforce existing legislation to prevent and solve inaccessibility issues. However, where street design is concerned, much depends on the planning and construction stages. Only recently, awareness about the duty to make streets accessible seems to have begun. With the ratification of CRPD in 2016 and the ensuing initiatives to introduce ‘inclusion agendas’ at municipal level, attention for accessibility of public space seems to be growing. In the inter-administrative supervisory system, however, no discernible initiatives have been taken. In 2021, the Environment and Planning Bill will come into force. The new law could make a change in attention for accessibility, because this is a designated theme of national importance. However, as the law and its associated regulations contain hardly any legally enforceable provisions, it remains to be seen to what extent changes can be expected.

E Cross-cutting issues

E1 Key Topical Issues

E1.1 Shared Space

Shared Space is a topic of discussion among local authorities and users of public space.²⁵⁷ According to the Knowledge Centre Shared Space, shared space is an innovative approach for the design and lay-out of public spaces that minimises the segregation between modes of road users. This is done by removing features such as kerbs, road surface markings, traffic signs, and traffic lights. By creating a greater sense of uncertainty and making it unclear who has priority, drivers will reduce their speed, in turn reducing the dominance of vehicles and improving traffic and spatial quality.²⁵⁸ In an increasing number of towns and cities, the shared space concept is applied. However, after several incidents and complaints by citizens, some cities have started to regulate shared space areas more strictly. Sometimes cyclists are banned between certain hours of the day,²⁵⁹ in other towns, the areas are being abandoned at all. For persons with certain types of disabilities, the use of shared space environments is experienced as problematic. Persons with low vision or blindness rely on distinctive, recognizable elements in the environment for their mobility.²⁶⁰ Shared spaces that do not comply with these principles are hard to use for persons with low vision. As a result, they may refrain from using this particular area.²⁶¹ Because many shared space areas are located in town centres and other areas where various road users mix, this may restrict their mobility.

E1.2 COVID-19 issues

After the outbreak of COVID-19 in March 2020, the Dutch government took a number of emergency measures to curb the spread of the virus. Measures involved restrictions in the use of public space. In the Netherlands, individuals were allowed to go out on the street and to visit shops to buy daily necessities during the peak of the pandemic. The standard minimum social distance between persons in public space was set at 1.5 m.²⁶² This distance was made compulsory by several consecutive emergency ordinances. Based on article 7 of the Public Health Act, the Minister for Public Health orders the Regional Safety Authorities to publish Emergency Ordinances. These Authorities, which consist of several neighbouring municipalities, set up and publish these ordinances. They are, in collaboration with the municipalities, responsible for implementation and enforcement.

The measures were often implemented by the establishment of one-way walking routes in town centres, putting up warning signs with information about keeping distance and deploying crowd management officials at busy pedestrian areas. The measures can be enforced by BOAs and police.

After some time, persons with disabilities and their representative organisations rang the alarm about the consequences of the measures. For persons with visual impairments, keeping the required distance proved to be difficult and reading warning signs is impossible. For persons needing personal care, such as help with pushing their wheelchair and other types of assistance, keeping the 1.5 m distance from their personal carer proved to be impossible. Several organisations issued guidance leaflets and manuals for public and private managers of public space.²⁶³ The National Association of Municipalities issued a manual for crowd control during COVID-19 measures. The manual includes guidance for measures that allow disabled persons to use the public space.²⁶⁴

The consecutive emergency orders issued by the Minister for Public Health, Welfare and Sports include some sections relating to persons with disabilities. Thus, an exception to the 1.5 meter requirement is granted to persons with a disability, ‘insofar as they cannot keep a distance of 1.5 meters towards their accompanying caregiver’. The exception is restricted to persons who are dependent of their carer. Independent persons with disabilities cannot invoke the exception.

E1.3 Promoting accessibility through law

The main issue in this report is whether existing laws, ordinances and regulations in the Netherlands are sufficient to make streets, pavements and pedestrian areas accessible for all.

This research has brought forward that accessible public spaces in the Netherlands do exist and that attention for accessibility for persons with disabilities, older people and other pedestrians with challenges in the use of public space, is growing. Existing legislation offers possibilities to address situations of inaccessibility. Legal pathways in the area of administrative law, criminal law and civil liability law offer opportunities to challenge obstructed or otherwise inaccessible streets.

However, inaccessible public spaces still exist. In practice, most issues concerning accessibility seem to arise at the municipal level. This may be explained by the fact that most pedestrians use public spaces in their own immediate environment. The number of pedestrian public spaces under the responsibility of provincial or the national authorities is comparatively small. That may also explain the relatively broader attention to accessibility of public spaces at the municipal level and the lack of laws and regulations regarding accessibility at provincial and national level. However, provinces and the national government deliver an important contribution to law making and planning in this area. National and provincial legislation and planning instruments

Gaps in laws, regulations and other legal instruments regarding accessibility can be identified in a number of areas. These include planning and design, prevention and enforcement.

Planning and design

Presumably as a result of a pre-existing lack of awareness, public authorities have not paid much attention to accessibility of streets in their planning and design over the past decades. At the national level, but similarly at the provincial and municipal level, traffic safety, prevention of congestion and, at a later stage, environmental considerations were major drivers for the design of streets and public spaces. Thinking about mobility has been guided by the idea that cars and public transport were the major mobility means. Only later, the conviction that cycling and walking were important means of transport became widespread. Environmental considerations as well as public annoyance of congested inner cities caused other views to take root. The forthcoming Environment and Planning Bill is evidence of this slowly changing paradigm towards other forms of mobility. Additionally, with the ratification of CRPD in 2016, the conviction that accessibility is an issue for policy and law making has started to take root.

However, where accessibility is concerned, the willingness in the fields of planning and design to develop enforceable standards is still low. The policy measures developed in the national programme Onbeperkt Meedoen! are hopeful developments, despite the fact that most of these are based on voluntary agreements with stakeholders. Legal measures regarding accessibility in the Environment and Planning Bill are limited in numbers and hardly enforceable. In that sense, accessibility does not have the similar level of political urgency as e.g. climate change or road safety.

Prevention and Enforcement

Following from the data collection in this report, taking away obstacles, hindrance or hazards in public space is a matter of action after situations have become noticeable. As stated above, where planning and design are concerned there seems to be little awareness or willingness to take enforceable accessibility provisions into consideration.

In terms of prevention, existing legislation could be useful. article 3:296 Civil Code offers the opportunity to use judicial intervention to prevent hazardous or inaccessible situations. However, this route is hardly ever used. As stated in chapter C1, there is no specific case law in this area, possibly because a civil procedure requires the costly engagement of an advocate.

That indicates that enforcement by public authorities is an important way to reach accessibility. Either on a report by a person who was confronted with an inaccessible situation, or on the initiative of a public authority, enforcement of existing legislation is a serious opportunity to address hazards and unusable public space. (c) Enforcement instruments do exist and are being used. In case of a violation of a law or a local decree, administrative enforcement through ‘extraordinary enforcement officers’ (BOAs) is possible. In cases of violation of traffic or other laws, the police has the power to enforce and to impose fines and other sanctions. However, it would require additional research to find out if and in how many cases, enforcement officers act on hazardous situations and infringements of the law in cases of inaccessible public spaces.

It needs to be mentioned that existing equal treatment law in the Netherlands is not applicable in the public sphere. That implies that inaccessibility cannot be addressed by way of non-discrimination law. As a consequence, inaccessibility of public space is hardly ever discussed in terms of inequality or discrimination.

E1.4 Strengths and Good Practices

Strengths:

As strengths in the field of addressing inaccessibility of public spaces may be mentioned:

• the ratification of CRPD, because

  • it imposes duties on public authorities to address accessibility
  • it has been an awareness raising instrument for the public and other non-state actors

• there is attention for the issue in parliament;

  
  

• accessibility is a national theme in the National Spatial Vision (Nationale omgevingsvisie),

  
  

• there are many local initiatives to raise the issue of accessibility:

  • accessibility is included in most of the local inclusion agendas;
  • at the national level and in many towns there exists an active NGO sector

Good practices:

As good practices may be mentioned:

• Local ‘UN Ambassadors’ putting disability issues on the local agenda;
• the National Action Plan Onbeperkt meedoen!, because it involves all government departments, private sector organisations and disabled people organisations;
• In Utrecht: the adoption of the handbook Voetpaden voor iedereen, for planning and monitoring purposes;
• In Almere: the VIP working group which was leading in drafting the new local policy agenda.

E1.5 Weaknesses and Concerns

Weaknesses:

As weaknesses may be mentioned:

• a preoccupation on the part of government departments about the costs of adjustments in society;
• the lack of willingness to impose enforceable provisions in the field of accessibility;
• The action plan Onbeperkt meedoen! with a high degree of voluntariness;
• The non-applicability of non-discrimination law in the public domain.

Concerns:

As concerns may be mentioned:

• A lack of willingness on the part of many municipalities to draft and implement a local inclusion agenda;
• A lack of awareness of accessibility among enforcement institutions.

E1.6 Recommendations

National level:

In the national programme Onbeperkt Meedoen! and, more specific in the Action Plan for Building, create more attention for accessibility of public spaces. Revise the upcoming Spatial and Environmental Planning Bill with a view to enforceable measures for accessible public spaces.

Provincial level:

Include accessibility in existing and future spatial development plans. Check municipal planning and environmental visions on accessibility of public places and apply inter-administrative supervision when municipalities do not comply with accessibility plans.

Municipal level:

Adopt an Inclusion Agenda in those municipalities where this has not been tabled. Include accessibility of public space as a part of the Inclusion Agenda. Include inaccessibility of pedestrian areas in the APV. Instruct enforcement officers to act in cases where a violation of the APV exists.

R References

R1 Bibliography

L. F. M. Besselink, ‘The Kingdom of the Netherlands’ in L. Besselink, P. Bovend’Eert, H. Broeksteeg, R.de Lange, & W. Voermans (eds.), Constitutional law of the EU member states (Kluwer 2014)

T. Bouwman, L. Delmée, J. Michgelsen, Adviesrapport Mobiliteit en verkeersveiligheid bij ouderen (Consortium Beter Oud, 2019).

College voor de Rechten van de Mens, Advies over de concepten van de Goedkeuringswet en Uitvoeringswet bij het VN-Verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap (College voor de Rechten van de Mens 2013)

College voor de Rechten van de Mens, VN-verdrag Handicap in Nederland 2017. Jaarlijkse rapportage over de naleving van het VN-verdrag handicap in Nederland (College voor de Rechten van de Mens 2017).

College voor de Rechten van de Mens, Toegankelijkheid van goederen en diensten. Jaarlijkse rapportage over de naleving van het VN-verdrag Handicap in Nederland (College voor de Rechten van de Mens 2019)

CROW, ASVV 2012. Aanbevelingen voor verkeersvoorzieningen binnen de bebouwde kom (publicatie 723) (CROW 2012)

R.J.J. Eshuis, B.J. Diephuis, Factsheet 2018-1. Civiele Rechtspraak (Wetenschappelijk Onderzoeks- en Documentatiecentrum 2018)

Gemeente Utrecht, Agenda 22, Plan 2012-2018 (Gemeente Utrecht 2012)

Gemeentebestuur Utrecht, Ruimte voor iedereen. Coalitieakkoord GroenLinks, D66, ChristenUnie, Utrecht 2018-2022 (Gemeente Utrecht 2018)

R. Gijsen, A. Verweij and C. Van den Brink, Cijferoverzicht Programma Onbeperkt meedoen! Indicatoren voor de actielijnen (RIVM 2019)

R. Grosscurt et al, Meting overkoepelende indicatoren programma Onbeperkt meedoen! (Nivel 2019)

A. Haan, M. Domenie, Beleidsscan VN-verdrag Handicap, (NVRR 2019)

J. Haug and F. Schuurman, Voetpaden voor iedereen (BAT 2020)

H. Havekes, Water Governance. The Dutch Water Authority Model (Dutch Water Authorities 2017)

N.M.C.P. Jägers and J.P. Loof, ‘Commentaar op artikel 1 van de Grondwet’ in E.M.H. Hirsch Ballin en G. Leenknegt (eds.), Artikelsgewijs commentaar op de Grondwet, webeditie 2020.

R. Kegge, Interadministrative supervision in spatial planning. A legal study of the benefits and the necessity of the reactive instruction as a supervisory instrument in Dutch spatial planning (Stichting Instituut voor Bouwrecht 2015)

A.L.M. Keirse, Mogelijkheden schadevoorkomingsplicht via aansprakelijkheidsrecht, Rapportage voor het Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu (Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law 2016)

Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports: Voortgangsrapportage Onbeperkt Meedoen 2019 (Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports 2019)

Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte. Nederland concurrerend, bereikbaar, leefbaar en veilig (Ministry for Infrastructure and the Environment 2012)

Nationale Ombudsman, Zorgen voor Burgers (‘Care for citizens’) (Nationale Ombudsman 2018)

Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, Submission to the committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,* concerning the initial report of the Netherlands*. (Netherlands Institute for Human Rights 2018)

B. Olij and H. van der Does, Verkeersongevallen 2018, SEH-bezoeken. Rapport 818 (VeiligheidNL 2019)

Barbara M. Oomen, ‘Between Signing and Ratifying: Preratification Politics, the Disability Convention, and the Dutch’ [2018] in: Human Rights Quarterly, 40 (2)

Openbaar Ministerie, Cijfers in Beeld 2019. Overzicht discriminatiecijfers Openbaar Ministerie (Openbaar Ministerie 2020)

PBT Consult, Integrale Standaard Toegankelijkheid 2018 (PBT Consult 2018)

K. Peijs, Bestuurlijke verkenning waterschapswegen. Waar een wil is, is een weg. (Ministry for Infrastructure and the Environment 2018)

G. de Ruiter et al, Zorgthermometer ggz (Vektis 2017)

Samenwerkende BRU-gemeenten, Snel, betrouwbaar en effectief. OV visie voor de regio Utrecht (Bestuur Regio Utrecht 2012)

S. Schaap and M. Dijkshoorn, Reguleren van drukte in de openbare ruimte. Handreiking crowd management bij het verantwoord openstellen. (Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenten 2020)

J.P. Schepers and R. Methorst, Voetgangersveiligheid erkenning van onveiligheid, oorzaken en beleidsmogelijkheden (SWOV 2012)

J. Schoonheim and J. Smits, Schaduwrapportage Verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap in Nederland (Ieder(in) 2019)

L. Waddington, ‘The domestication of the CRPD, Domestic Legal Status of the CRPD and relevance for Court Judgments’, in Waddington, L. and Lawson, A. (eds), The UN Convention on te Rights of Persons with Disabilities, A comparative analysis of the Role of Courts, (Oxford University Press 2018)

G. Walz, S. van Bon and B. Fiere, Discriminatiecijfers in 2019, (Art.1 2020)

R2 Table of Legislation

Laws

Algemene wet gelijke behandeling

Algemene wet bestuursrecht

Burgerlijk wetboek

Gemeentewet

Goedkeuringswet VN-verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap (2013)

Grondwet

Politiewet

Provinciewet

Uitvoeringswet VN-verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap (2013)

Waterschapswet

Wegenwet

Wegenverkeerswet

Wet personenvervoer 2000

Wet gemeentelijke antidiscriminatievoorzieningen

Wet herverdeling wegenbeheer 1992

Wet ruimtelijke ordening

Wetboek van strafrecht

Wetboek van strafvordering

Woningwet

Regulations and decrees

Algemene Plaatselijke Verordening Almere

Algemene Plaatselijke Verordening Utrecht

Besluit administratieve bepalingen inzake het wegverkeer

Besluit algemene toegankelijkheid

Besluit toegankelijkheid openbaar vervoer

Bouwbesluit

Bouwverordening Almere

Bouwverordening Utrecht

Omgevingsprogramma Flevoland

Reglement verkeersregels en verkeerstekens 1990 (RVV1990)

Wegenverordening provincie Utrecht 2010

R3 Table of Cases

Administrative Jurisdiction Division Council of State 5 March 2008, ECLI:NL:RVS:2008:BC6035

Administrative Jurisdiction Division Council of State, 8 July 2009, ECLI:NL:RVS:2009:BJ1901

Administrative Jurisdiction Division Council of State 18 February 2018, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:590

Appeal Court Arnhem-Leeuwarden 4 February 2019, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2019:981

District court’s-Hertogenbosch 26 March 2009, ECLI:NL:RBSHE:2009:BH7428

District court Amsterdam 12 June 2019, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2019:3375

District court Overijssel 10 May 2019, ECLI:NL:RBOVE:2019:1577

District court Amsterdam 18 March 2019, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2019:1874

European Court of Justice, Case 26/62 NV Algemene Transport- en Expeditie Onderneming van Gend & Loos v Netherlands Inland Revenue Administration [1963] ECLI:EU:C:1963:1

National Institute for Human Rights 16 November 2017, judgment no. 2017-134

Supreme Court 31 January 1919, (Lindenbaum/Cohen), NJ 1919, 161

Supreme Court 5 November 1965 (Basement Latch),  ECLI:NL:HR:1965:AB7079.

Supreme Court 30 May 1986, ECLI:NL:HR:1986:AC9402

Supreme Court 27 May 1988 (Peat Scalding), ECLI:NL:HR:1988:AD0344

Supreme Court 21 March 2003 (Nitrate Directive), ECLI:NL:HR:2003:AE8462

Supreme Court 28 May 2004 (Jet blast), ECLI:NL:HR:2004:AO4224

Supreme Court 17 December 2010 (Peat Dike Wilnis), ECLI:NL:HR:2010:BN6236

Supreme Court 4 April 2014 (Falling cyclist), ECLI:NL:HR:2014:831

Supreme Court 10 October 2014, ECLI:NL:HR:2014:2928

Supreme Court 20 December 2019 (Urgenda), ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2006

R4 Databases and Search Engines Used

Databases: CBS Statline

Search engine: Google

Annex 1: Glossary of Key Terms

Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak Raad van State (ABRvS): The Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State is the highest general administrative court in the Netherlands. It hears and adjudicates appeals lodged by members of the public or companies against decisions or orders given by municipal, provincial or central government.

Alliantie VN-verdrag Handicap (Alliance UN Convention on the rights of persons with a disability) has as its objective to make the voice of persons with disabilities as loud as possible. It exists of DPOs Ieder(in), MIND Landelijk Platform GGz, Per Saldo and LFB.

BOA: Buitengewoon Opsporingsambtenaar (‘Extraordinary Enforcement Officer’): an official who, by virtue of his task, in subordination to the competent authority, in accordance with the applicable legal rules and with the help of the powers and resources made available to him, is responsible for the investigation of criminal offenses and with the preparation of any prosecution of these facts.

Court system: The Netherlands is divided into 11 district courts, 4 courts of appeal and 1 Supreme Court. Most cases start at a district court. Every district court has a limited jurisdiction sector, which hears cases such as employment or rent disputes, and civil cases involving claims of up to €25,000. This sector also hears cases involving minor criminal offences (misdemeanours).

Appeal and cassation: If one of the parties disagrees with the court’s ruling, the case may be referred to a court of appeal and subsequently, through an appeal in cassation, to the Supreme Court.

Stb.: Staatsblad. Official Journal, in which new and adapted acts, decrees and regulations are published. Only after publication in the Staatsblad, a law may enter into force.

Trb.: Tractatenblad. Treaty Bulletin, the official journal in which international treaties and conventions are published.

Footnotes

1. Article 42 Constitution of the Netherlands: 1. The government consists of the King and the ministers. 2. The King is inviolable; the ministers are responsible. ↩︎

2. See: https://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie-en-contact/Organisatie/Hoge-Raad-der-Nederlanden/Supreme-court-of-the-Netherlands/Paginas/The-ban-on-constitutional-review.aspx (accessed 09-03-2020) ↩︎

3. https://www.raadvanstate.nl/talen/artikel/ ↩︎

4. Article 93 Constitution: Provisions of treaties and of resolutions by international institutions which may be binding on all persons by virtue of their contents shall become binding after they have been published. ↩︎

5. L. F. M. Besselink ‘The Kingdom of the Netherlands’ in L. Besselink, P. Bovend’Eert, H. Broeksteeg, R.de Lange, & W. Voermans (eds.), Constitutional law of the EU member states (Kluwer 2014), p. 1205-1208. ↩︎

6. Supreme Court 30 May 1986, ECLI:NL:HR:1986:AC9402: ‘Only the content of the provision is decisive: does it oblige the Dutch legislator to make a national regulation with certain content or scope, or is it of such a nature that the provision in the national legal order can simply function as an objective right?’ ↩︎

7. Supreme Court 10 October 2014, ECLI:NL:HR:2014:2928. ↩︎

8. Supreme Court 20 December 2019, ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2006 (Urgenda), Para 5.6.1, See for an English translation https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2007. Also see ↩︎

9. Case 26/62 NV Algemene Transport- en Expeditie Onderneming van Gend & Loos v Netherlands Inland Revenue Administration ECLI:EU:C:1963:1 [1963]. ↩︎

10. Article 1, Constitution of the Netherlands. ↩︎

11. N.M.C.P. Jägers & J.P. Loof, ‘Commentaar op artikel 1 van de Grondwet’ in: E.M.H. Hirsch Ballin en G. Leenknegt (eds.), Artikelsgewijs commentaar op de Grondwet, webeditie 2020 (www.Nederlandrechtsstaat.nl). ↩︎

12. Parliamentary Documents II 2009–2010, 32 411, nr. 2. ↩︎

13. Parliamentary Documents II 2019–2020, 32 411, HTK20192020-33-5. ↩︎

14. For a brief overview in English, see https://libguides.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/c.php?g=423114&p=2889158 Accessed 19 June 2020. ↩︎

15. https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_member_state_law-6-nl-en.do Accessed 19 June 2020 ↩︎

16. L. F. M. Besselink ‘The Kingdom of the Netherlands’ in L. Besselink, P. Bovend’Eert, H. Broeksteeg, R.de Lange, & W. Voermans (eds.), Constitutional law of the EU member states (Kluwer 2014), p. 1204. ↩︎

17. Article 5(2) Charter: ‘The Constitution shall have regard to the provisions of the Charter.’ Article 142 of the Constitution provides that ‘[t]he Constitution may be brought into line with the Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands by act of parliament.’ ↩︎

18. See also: https://www.government.nl/topics/environment/roles-and-responsibilities-of-provincial-government-municipal-governments-and-water-authorities Accessed 10 April 2020. ↩︎

19. Wet herverdeling wegenbeheer. Act of 29 October 1992, Stb. 1992, 563. ↩︎

20. Article 118 Provinces Act and article 149, Municipalities Act. ↩︎

21. https://www.rijkswaterstaat.nl/wegen/wegbeheer/wegbeheer-in-nederland/index.aspx Accessed 1 July 2020. ↩︎

22. https://www.government.nl/topics/environment/roles-and-responsibilities-of-provincial-government-municipal-governments-and-water-authorities Accessed 1 June 2020. ↩︎

23. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinces_of_the_Netherlands Accessed 02 March 2020. ↩︎

24. Article 2.2 Wet ruimtelijke ordening (‘Spatial Planning Act’) ↩︎

25. Article 124 Gemeentewet (‘Municipalities Act’) ↩︎

26. Article 122 Provinciewet (‘Provinces Act’). ↩︎

27. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/onze-diensten/methoden/classificaties/overig/gemeentelijke-indelingen-per-jaar/indeling%20per%20jaar/gemeentelijke-indeling-op-1-januari-2019 Accessed 2 March 2020 ↩︎

28. Wet maatschappelijke ondersteuning 2015 (‘Social Support Act 2015’), https://www.government.nl/topics/care-and-support-at-home/social-support-act-wmo Accessed 2 March 2020. ↩︎

29. Article 2.1.2 lid 2 sub H, Social Support Act 2015 and article 2.2 lid 2 sub f, Youth Act. ↩︎

30. Parliamentary Documents II, 2015/16, 33 990, nr. 35. ↩︎

31. A. Haan, M. Domenie, Beleidsscan VN-verdrag Handicap (‘Policy Scan CRPD’), (NVRR 2019), p. 3. ↩︎

32. Article 3.1 Wet ruimtelijke ordening (‘Spatial Planning Act’). ↩︎

33. Article 46, Waterschapswet (‘Regional Water Boards Act’). ↩︎

34. Act of 2 September 1991, Stb. 1991, 444. ↩︎

35. H. Havekes, Water Governance. The Dutch Water Authority Model, (Dutch Water Authorities 2017), p. 24. https://dutchwaterauthorities.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-Dutch-water-authority-model-2017.pdf Accessed 4 April 2020. ↩︎

36. K. Peijs, Bestuurlijke verkenning waterschapswegen. Waar een wil is, is een weg. (Ministry for Infrastructure and the Environment 2018), p. 7. https://www.uvw.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Bestuurlijke-verkenning-waterschapswegen-Waar-een-wil-is-is-een-weg-2018.pdf ↩︎

37. Article 3.1.6 Spatial Planning Decree (Besluit ruimtelijke ordening). ↩︎

38. Trb. 2007, 169. ↩︎

39. For an account of the preratification process, see: Barbara M. Oomen, ‘Between Signing and Ratifying: Preratification Politics, the Disability Convention, and the Dutch’ [2018] in Human Rights Quarterly, 40 (2), 420- 46. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3128896 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3128896 ↩︎

40. Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, Submission to the committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities*,** concerning the initial report of the Netherlands.* (Netherlands Institute for Human Rights 2018), p. 27. ↩︎

41. Parliamentary Documents II, 2013-2014, 33 992 (R2034), no. 3, p. 95. ↩︎

42. Parliamentary Documents II, 2013-2014, 33 990 and Parliamentary Documents I, 2015-2016, 33 990 no. A. ↩︎

43. Parliamentary Documents II, 2013-2014, 33 990 no. 3, p. 5. See para A4.1 below for a more extensive description. ↩︎

44. Parliamentary Documents II, 2015-2016, 33 990 no. 45.5. ↩︎

45. Parliamentary Documents I, 2015-2016, 33 990 no. A and Parliamentary Documents I, 2015–2016, 33 992 (R2034), B, p. 10. ↩︎

46. Initial report submitted by the Netherlands under article 35 of the Convention, p. 25. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3794832 (accessed 16 March 2020). ↩︎

47. Initial report submitted by the Netherlands under article 35 of the Convention, point 79, p. 13. ↩︎

48. https://mensenrechten.nl/nl/publicatie/5c051025c155b7037d1ec495 Accessed 13 May 2020. ↩︎

49. https://iederin.nl/positie-van-mensen-met-een-beperking-gaat-achteruit-ondanks-vn-verdrag-handicap/ Accessed 13 May 2020. ↩︎

50. J. Schoonheim and J. Smits, Schaduwrapportage Verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap in Nederland (Shadow report Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities in the Netherlands). (Ieder(in) 2019), p. 17. ↩︎

51. This seems to be in line with the application of CRPD in other jurisdictions: L. Waddington, ‘The domestication of the CRPD, Domestic Legal Status of the CRPD and relevance for Court Judgments’, in Waddington, L. and Lawson, A., The UN Convention on te Rights of Persons with Disabilities, A comparative analysis of the Role of Courts, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018), pp. 539-575*.* ↩︎

52. District court Amsterdam 12 June 2019, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2019:3375 ↩︎

53. District court Overijssel 10 May 2019, ECLI:NL:RBOVE:2019:1577 ↩︎

54. District court Amsterdam 18 March 2019, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2019:1874 ↩︎

55. https://www.sdgnederland.nl/nieuws/ Accessed 1 June 2020. ↩︎

56. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Derde Nederlandse SDG Rapportage. Nederland Ontwikkelt Duurzaam (‘Third Dutch SDG Report. The Netherlands are developing sustainably’), (May 2019), p.14-15, 17. ↩︎

57. Act of 3 April 2003, Stb. 2003, 206. ↩︎

58. Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation [2000], OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16–22. ↩︎

59. Parliamentary Documents II, 2001-2002, 28 169 no. 3, p. 9, Memorandum of Explanation. ↩︎

60. Parliamentary Documents II, 2001-2002, 28 169 no. 3, p. 12, Memorandum of Explanation. ↩︎

61. Parliamentary Documents II, 2013-2014, 33 990 no. 3, p. 5, Memorandum of Explanation. ↩︎

62. Act of 17 December 2003, Stb. 2004, 30. ↩︎

63. Parliamentary Documents II, 2013-2014, 33 990 no. 3, p. 8, Memorandum of Explanation. ↩︎

64. Articles 137d and 137f Criminal Code. ↩︎

65. Article 429quater Criminal Code. ↩︎

66. G. Walz, S. van Bon and B. Fiere, Discriminatiecijfers in 2019 (Discrimination data in 2019), (Art.1 2020), p. 29. https://discriminatie.nl/files/2020-04/Discriminatiecijfers%20in%202019.pdf ↩︎

67. Openbaar Ministerie, ‘Cijfers in Beeld 2019. Overzicht discriminatiecijfers Openbaar Ministerie’ (Data in the picture 2019. Overview discrimination data Public Prosecution Service) (Openbaar Ministerie 2020), p. 21. https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/discriminatie/documenten/publicaties/discriminatie/lecd/cijfers-in-beeld/cijfers-in-beeld ↩︎

68. Parliamentary Documents II, 2009-2009, 29 355, no. 39. ↩︎

69. https://www.discriminatie.nl/#/home Accessed 29 June 2020. ↩︎

70. Act of 25 June 2009, Stb. 2009, no. 313. ↩︎

71. G. Walz, S. van Bon, B. Fiere, ‘Discriminatiecijfers in 2019’, (‘Discrimination data in 2019’), (Art.1 2020), p. 87. ↩︎

72. G. Walz, S. van Bon, B. Fiere,Discriminatiecijfers in 2019 (‘Discrimination data in 2019’), (Art.1 2020), p. 46. ↩︎

73. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports: Programma VN-Verdrag Onbeperkt Meedoen, https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/rechten-van-mensen-met-een-handicap/programma-onbeperkt-meedoen Parliamentary Documents II 2017/18, 24 170, no. 177. ↩︎

74. Actieplan Toegankelijkheid voor de bouw (“Action Plan for accessible building’). Ministry of the Interior, reference no. 2017-0000648748 [2018] p. 13 ↩︎

75. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports: Programma VN-Verdrag Onbeperkt Meedoen, p. 16-17. ↩︎

76. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports: Programma VN-Verdrag Onbeperkt Meedoen, p. 23-25. ↩︎

77. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports: Programma VN-Verdrag Onbeperkt Meedoen, p. 28-29. ↩︎

78. https://nietsoveronszonderons.nl/ Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

79. https://vng.nl/rubrieken/onderwerpen/iedereen-doet-mee Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

80. https://www.mkbtoegankelijk.nl/over-mkb-toegankelijk/ Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

81. https://magazines.rijksoverheid.nl/vws/onbeperktmeedoen/2019/01/index Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

82. Letter of the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sports6 June 2019, Parliamentary Documents II 2019-2020, 24 170, no. 192. ↩︎

83. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports: Voortgangsrapportage Onbeperkt Meedoen 2019 (‘Progress Report Unlimited Participation 2019’), p. 10. ↩︎

84. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports: Voortgangsrapportage Onbeperkt Meedoen 2019 (‘Progress Report Unlimited Participation 2019’), p. 29. ↩︎

85. Letter of the Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Relations 27 February 2020, Parliamentary Documents II 2019-2020, 32 757 no. 167. ↩︎

86. https://www.rivm.nl/documenten/cijferoverzicht-onbeperkt-meedoen Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

87. R. Grosscurt et al, Meting overkoepelende indicatoren programma Onbeperkt meedoen!, (Nivel, 2019). https://www.nivel.nl/nl/publicatie/meting-overkoepelende-indicatoren-programma-onbeperkt-meedoen-2016-2018 Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

88. R. Gijsen, A. Verweij and C. Van den Brink, Cijferoverzicht Programma Onbeperkt meedoen! Indicatoren voor de actielijnen (‘Data overview Program Unlimited participation! Indicators for the action lines’) (RIVM 2019), p. 6. ↩︎

89. Parliamentary Documents II 2019-2020, 24 170, no. 201. ↩︎

90. Parliamentary Documents II 2019-2020, 24 170, no. 218. ↩︎

91. College voor de Rechten van de Mens, Toegankelijkheid van goederen en diensten. Jaarlijkse rapportage over de naleving van het VN-verdrag Handicap in Nederland (‘Accessibility of goods and services. Annual report on compliance with the UN Convention on Persons with Disabilities in the Netherlands’) (College voor de Rechten van de Mens 2019), p. 47. ↩︎

92. J. Schoonheim and J. Smits, Schaduwrapportage Verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap in Nederland (Shadow report Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities in the Netherlands). Utrecht: Ieder(in) 2019, p. 18 and p. 44. ↩︎

93. G. de Ruiter et al, Zorgthermometer ggz. (Vektis 2017), p.4. Population of 18 years and older; persons receiving mental health care, including specialized care, basic care, GP-supported care and long-term care. ↩︎

94. https://azwstatline.cbs.nl/#/AZW/nl/dataset/24062NED/table?ts=1592838413158 Accessed 22 June 2020. ↩︎

95. Nationale Ombudsman, Zorgen voor Burgers (‘Care for citizens’) (Nationale Ombudsman 2018) https://www.nationaleombudsman.nl/nieuws/onderzoeken/2018030-zorgen-voor-burgers-onderzoek-naar-knelpunten-bij-de-toegang-tot-zorg Accessed 22 June 2020. ↩︎

96. https://www.nationaleombudsman.nl/nieuws/2018/hokjesdenken-speelt-burger-nog-altijd-parten-bij-toegang-tot-zorg-update-januari-2019 Accessed 22 June 2020. ↩︎

97. https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/7461BEV/table?fromstatweb Accessed 26 June 2020. ↩︎

98. T. Bouwman, L. Delmée, J. Michgelsen, Adviesrapport Mobiliteit en verkeersveiligheid bij ouderen (Advisory report Mobility and road safety among the elderly) (Consortium Beter Oud, 2019). ↩︎

99. https://www.beteroud.nl/mobiliteit-ouderen Accessed 22 June 2020. ↩︎

100. Articles 7 and 8, Act on equal treatment on grounds of disability/chronic illness. ↩︎

101. Decree on accessibility of public transport of 31 March 2011, containing rules regarding the accessibility of public transport and the adjustments to be made to that end (‘Besluit toegankelijkheid openbaar vervoer’). ↩︎

102. Regulation of the State Secretary for Health, Welfare and Sport and of the Minister of Infrastructure and the Environment of 4 April 2012, laying down rules regarding the accessibility of public transport (‘Regeling toegankelijkheid openbaar vervoer’). ↩︎

103. Article 2.1, Decree on accessibility of public transport. ↩︎

104. Article 2.2, Decree on accessibility of public transport. ↩︎

105. National Institute for Human Rights, 16 November 2017, judgment 2017-134. ↩︎

106. Parliamentary Documents II, 2018-2019, 24 170, no. 193, p. 7. ↩︎

107. Parliamentary Documents II, 2018-2019, 24 170, no. 193, p. 8. ↩︎

108. https://www.prorail.nl/reizigers/stations/toegankelijkheid ↩︎

109. https://www.oogvereniging.nl/2017/10/stations-nederland-toegankelijk-blinden-en-slechtzienden/ ↩︎

110. https://www.oogvereniging.nl/leven-werken/verkeer-vervoer/weg-vinden-op-station/ ↩︎

111. https://www.oogvereniging.nl/english/ ↩︎

112. https://www.oogvereniging.nl/2017/06/15627/ ↩︎

113. https://www.ns.nl/en/travel-information/traveling-with-a-functional-disability/assistance-while-travelling.html ↩︎

114. https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/openbaar-vervoer/betere-verbindingen-openbaar-vervoer/ov-in-de-toekomst ↩︎

115. https://magazines.rijksoverheid.nl/ienw/ienw-specials/2019/07/pijler-2-drempelloos-van-deur-tot-deur ↩︎

116. https://mensenrechten.nl/nl/netherlands-institute-human-rights Accessed 20 April 2020. ↩︎

117. https://mensenrechten.nl/nl/publicatie/5de636e4b55daa48dd78be31 . ↩︎

118. College voor de Rechten van de Mens, Toegankelijkheid van goederen en diensten. Jaarlijkse rapportage over de naleving van het VN-verdrag Handicap in Nederland. (‘Accessibility of goods and services. Annual report on compliance with the UN Convention on Persons with Disabilities in the Netherlands’) Utrecht: College voor de Rechten van de Mens 2019, p. 28. ↩︎

119. Wet ruimtelijke ordening, Act of 22 May 2008, Stb. 2008, 180. ↩︎

120. https://www.government.nl/topics/spatial-planning-and-infrastructure/spatial-planning-in-the-netherlands Accessed 18 May 2020. ↩︎

121. https://www.ruimtelijkeplannen.nl/ Accessed 22 April 2020. ↩︎

122. Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment (2012), Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte. Nederland concurrerend, bereikbaar, leefbaar en veilig. (‘National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning. Making the Netherlands competitive, accessible, liveable and safe’.) https://www.government.nl/topics/spatial-planning-and-infrastructure/documents/publications/2013/07/24/summary-national-policy-strategy-for-infrastructure-and-spatial-planning Accessed 22 April 2020. ↩︎

123. Besluit van 29 augustus 2011 houdende vaststelling van voorschriften met betrekking tot het bouwen, gebruiken en slopen van bouwwerken (Bouwbesluit 2012) (‘Building Decree 2012’) ↩︎

124. Woningwet 2015 (‘Housing Act 2015’), Stb. 2015, 145. ↩︎

125. Article 5.1.3. Building Decree, section 2: The roads and paths referred to in the first paragraph: (a) must be at least 1.10 meters wide; and (b) must not have a free passage smaller than 0.85 meters; and © may not exceed a height difference of 0.02 m, unless this is done by means of a ramp that complies with the provisions of Articles 2.39 and 2.40 of the Building Decree. ↩︎

126. Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, Veilig van deur tot deur: strategisch plan verkeersveiligheid 2030 (‘Safety from door to door: strategic road safety plan 2030’) (2018). ↩︎

127. https://ruimtevoorlopen.nl/partners/ Accessed 19 June 2020. ↩︎

128. https://www.crow.nl/over-crow/nieuws/2019/oktober-(1)/lancering-platform-ruimte-voor-lopen-tijdens-walk2 Accessed 19 June 2020. ↩︎

129. https://www.swov.nl/publicatie/voetgangersveiligheid-0 Accessed 19 June 2020. ↩︎

130. https://www.wandelnet.nl/beleidsdossiers Accessed 19 June 2020. ↩︎

131. https://iederin.nl/onze-doelen/vervoer/ Accessed 19 June 2020. ↩︎

132. https://ruimtevoorlopen.nl/agenda-lopen/ Accessed 19 June 2020. ↩︎

133. https://www.crow.nl/english-summary Accessed 17 July 2020. ↩︎

134. https://www.crow.nl/publicaties/asvv-2012 Accessed 17 July 2020. ↩︎

135. Administrative Jurisdiction Division Council of State, 8 July 2009, ECLI:NL:RVS:2009:BJ1901, para 2.4.5. ↩︎

136. Parliamentary Documents I, 2014-2015, 33 962 no. A. ↩︎

137. Letter from the Minister for Building and Environment, 1 April 2020, ref no. 2020-0000174160. ↩︎

138. Article 2.1.3 and article 2.28 (f) of the Environment and Planning Bill. ↩︎

139. Amendment-Dik-Faber/Albert de Vries, Parliamentary Documents II, 2014-2015, 33 962 no. 157. ↩︎

140. Besluit kwaliteit leefomgeving, Stb. 2018, 292. ↩︎

141. Besluit kwaliteit leefomgeving, explanatory note 8.1.10. Promotion of accessibility of public space for persons. The text was included after the adoption of parliamentary motion-Çegerek of 19 December 2016, Parliamentary Documents II, 2016-17, 33 118, no. 56. ↩︎

142. PBT Consult: Integrale Standaard Toegankelijkheid 2018 ( ‘Integrated Accessibility Standard 2018’) (PBT Consult 2018). This Standard contains international norms as agreed in ISO21542. https://standards.globalspec.com/std/10297376/NEN-ISO%2021542 Accessed 22 April 2020. ↩︎

143. Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, Toelichting Ontwerp Nationale Omgevingsvisie, (‘Explanatory note Draft National Strategy on Spatial Planning and the Environment’ (2019), p. 29. Version in English: https://www.denationaleomgevingsvisie.nl/publicaties/english+versions/default.aspx, p.48. ↩︎

144. E.g. see: Municipality of Almere, Omgevingsvisie Almere. Structuurvisie Almere conform Wro. (2017). (‘Environmental Vision Almere. Structural vision in accordance with Wro, 2017’), p. 8. ↩︎

145. College voor de Rechten van de Mens: Advies over de concepten van de Goedkeuringswet en Uitvoeringswet bij het VN-Verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap (2013) https://mensenrechten.nl/nl/publicatie/18564 Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

146. Kiesraad, Consultatie Goedkeuringswet en Uitvoeringswet bij VN-verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap (2013). https://www.kiesraad.nl/adviezen-en-publicaties/adviezen/2013/08/27/meer-aandacht-voor-kiezers-met-een-handicap ↩︎

147. https://www.internetconsultatie.nl/vnverdraghandicap/details Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

148. Parliamentary Documents II, 2013-2014, 33992 (R2034), no. 3, p. 15-21. ↩︎

149. Letter of the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sports6 June 2019, Parliamentary Documents II 2019-2020, 24 170, no. 192. ↩︎

150. https://gewoongelijk.nl/over-deze-website/alliantie-voor-Inclusie/ Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

151. https://www.vno-ncw.nl/over-vno-ncw/english Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

152. https://www.mkb.nl/over-mkb-nederland/english Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

153. https://vng.nl/artikelen/koplopergemeenten-iedereen-doet-mee Accessed 15 June 2020. ↩︎

154. College voor de Rechten van de Mens ‘VN-verdrag Handicap in Nederland 2017. Jaarlijkse rapportage over de naleving van het VN-verdrag handicap in Nederland’ (‘UN-Convention on Disability in the Netherlands 2017. Annual report on compliance with the UN Convention on disability in the Netherlands’) (College voor de Rechten van de Mens 2017). ↩︎

155. See chapter A2.1: Initial report submitted by the Netherlands under article 35 of the Convention. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3794832. ↩︎

156. https://mensenrechten.nl/nl/publicatie/5c051025c155b7037d1ec495, includes a version in English. ↩︎

157. Act of 4 November 1992, Stb. 1992, 563 ↩︎

158. Ordinance of 28 June 2010, Provincial Journal 2010, 38. ↩︎

159. Samenwerkende BRU-gemeenten, Snel, betrouwbaar en effectief. OV visie voor de regio Utrecht (‘Fast, reliable and effective. Public transport vision for the Utrecht region’). (Bestuur Regio Utrecht 2012), p. 48. ↩︎

160. Ordinance of 27 February 2019, Provincial Journal 2019-2248. ↩︎

161. Consolidated Environmental Ordinance 2019, article 15.6: ‘It is forbidden to use a public road or waterway, other than for which it is intended: (…) to deposit, place or deposit solids or objects therein, thereon, below or above, or to leave or keep them there.’ ↩︎

162. Decree of 15 March 2019, Omgevingsprogramma Flevoland (Environmental Planning Programme), Provincial Journal 2019-1849. ↩︎

163. Environmental Planning Programme Flevoland, section 7.6.7.4. ↩︎

164. Environmental Planning Programme Flevoland, section 4.1. ↩︎

165. Agenda 22 refers to the 22 Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, adopted by the General Assembly on 20 December 1993 (resolution 48/96 annex). ↩︎

166. Decision of 26 June 2012, https://ris2.ibabs.eu/Reports/ViewListEntry/Utrecht/b3ccc49b-0ca1-4a25-950e-7d3c990db135. ↩︎

167. Gemeente Utrecht Agenda 22, Plan 2012-2018 (Gemeente Utrecht 2012), p. 19. https://www.utrecht.nl/fileadmin/uploads/documenten/ondernemen/bing-beheer-inrichting-gebruik/Plan_Agenda_22_2012_2018.pdf,. ↩︎

168. Gemeentebestuur Utrecht, Ruimte voor iedereen. Coalitieakkoord GroenLinks, D66, ChristenUnie, Utrecht 2018-2022 (Gemeente Utrecht 2018), p. 15. ↩︎

169. https://vng.nl/artikelen/koplopergemeenten-iedereen-doet-mee ↩︎

170. https://vng.nl/artikelen/about-vng ↩︎

171. https://www.utrecht.nl/zorg-en-onderwijs/samenleven-welzijn/utrecht-voor-iedereen/toegankelijk/ ↩︎

172. Policy letter to the City Council, 24 January 2017. Progress Report Utrecht Standaard Toegankelijk https://www.utrecht.nl/fileadmin/uploads/documenten/zorg-en-onderwijs/samenleven-welzijn/Toegankelijk/Utrecht-Standaard-Toegankelijk-januari-2017.pdf ↩︎

173. https://wheelmap.org/ ↩︎

174. https://www.bezoek-utrecht.nl/toegankelijk/openbare-ruimtes ↩︎

175. Gemeente Utrecht, Kadernota Kwaliteit Openbare Ruimte 2016 (‘Framework Document Quality of Public Space 2016)’, p.10: “where necessary and possible, the interests of disabled persons are taken into account as equally as possible in all aspects of a design”. ↩︎

176. The BING committee (‘Beheer, Inrichting, Gebruik – ‘Management, organization, use’) reviews local street construction plans. ↩︎

177. J. Haug and F. Schuurman, Voetpaden voor iedereen (‘Footpaths for everyone’). (BAT 2020). http://www.batutrecht.nl/download/Voetpaden%20voor%20iedereen.pdf . Accessed 15 April 2020. ↩︎

178. The ASVV manual is published by CROW, a technology platform for transport, infrastructure and public space. Many municipalities comply with the ASVV as the leading guideline for the design and management of traffic and roads. https://www.crow.nl/english-summary . ↩︎

179. NEN 1814 is standardization tool for accessibility for the construction industry, published by the Netherlands Standardization Institute NEN. https://www.nen.nl/Home_EN.htm Accessed 15 April 2020. ↩︎

180. Based on article 149 Municipalities Act. ↩︎

181. Articles 2.9 and 2.32, General Local Ordinance Utrecht. ↩︎

182. Kadernota Kwaliteit Openbare Ruimte. Een integrale benadering van gebruik, inrichting en beheer (‘Framework Memorandum for the quality of public space. An integrated approach to use, design and management’) (Gemeente Utrecht 2018), p. 10. ↩︎

183. Agenda en Uitvoeringsprogramma Het VN-verdrag Handicap in Utrecht. Uitvoeringsprogramma Utrecht toegankelijk voor iedereen. (The UN- Convention on Disability. Implementation programme ‘Utrecht accessible for everyone’) (Gemeente Utrecht 2018) https://ris2.ibabs.eu/Agenda/Details/Utrecht/5fef184d-503c-400b-98b2-51d661379d57 Accessed 29 June 2020. ↩︎

184. Het VN-verdrag Handicap in Utrecht. Uitvoeringsprogramma Utrecht toegankelijk voor iedereen. (The UN- Convention on Disability. Implementation programme ‘Utrecht accessible for everyone’), p. 35. ↩︎

185. https://pki.utrecht.nl/Loket/product/1baaf0d10f5a241b54fefb981df680e8 Accessed 29 June 2020. ↩︎

186. https://www.solgu.nl/ Accessed 20 April 2020. ↩︎

187. Gemeente Almere, Doen wat nodig is. Kadernota sociaal domein 2014 (‘Doing what it takes. Framework document social domain 2014’) (Gemeente Almere 2014), p. 27. ↩︎

188. Including the Youth Act, Participation Act and the Social Support Act 2015. https://www.government.nl/topics/care-and-support-at-home/social-support-act-wmo accessed 10 April 2020. ↩︎

189. Gemeente Almere, Mobiliteitsplan Almere Veilig en gezond op weg (‘Mobility Plan Almere, Safe and healthy underway’) (Gemeente Almere 2012), p. 42 – 46. ↩︎

190. Stadsbeheer, Advies en Ingenieurs Bureau, Gemeente Almere, ‘Visie Beheer Openbare Ruimte. Beheer maakt het verschil’ (‘Vision Management Public Space. Management makes the difference.’) (August 2012). ↩︎

191. Gemeente Almere, Handboek Bereikbaarheid, Leefbaarheid, Veiligheid en Communicatie (‘Manual Accessibility, Livability, Safety and Communication.’) (Gemeente Almere 2014), p. 22. ↩︎

192. Gemeente Almere, Anticiperen op wat nodig is. Beleidskader sociaal domein 2019-2022 (‘Foreseeing what it takes. Policy framework social domain 2019-2022’), (Gemeente Almere 2019), p. 9. ↩︎

193. Gemeente Almere, Inclusie-agenda Almere 2018-2021 (‘Inclusion Agenda Almere 2018-2021’), p. 9 – 12. https://www.almere.nl/fileadmin/files/almere/AlmereKracht/Inclusieagenda_Almere_2018-2021.pdf accessed 10 April 2020. ↩︎

194. Articles 2.6 and 2.8 General Local Ordinance 2011 Almere. ↩︎

195. Article 2.52 General Local Ordinance 2011 Almere. ↩︎

196. Gemeente Almere, Omgevingsvisie Almere. Structuurvisie Almere conform Wro (‘Environmental Vision Almere. Structural vision in accordance with Spatial Planning Act, 2017’) (Gemeente Almere 2017). ↩︎

197. Gemeente Almere, Omgevingsvisie Almere. Structuurvisie Almere conform Wro (‘Environmental Vision Almere. Structural vision in accordance with Spatial Planning Act, 2017’) (Gemeente Almere 2017), p. 24. ↩︎

198. Gemeente Almere, Omgevingsvisie Almere. Structuurvisie Almere conform Wro (‘Environmental Vision Almere. Structural vision in accordance with Spatial Planning Act, 2017’) (Gemeente Almere 2017), p. 20. ↩︎

199. Gemeente Almere, Anticiperen op wat nodig is. Beleidskader sociaal domein 2019-2022 (‘Foreseeing what it takes. Policy framework social domain 2019-2022’) (Gemeente Almere 2018). ↩︎

200. https://www.decreatievemotor.nl/partners-betrokkenen Accessed 20 April 2020. ↩︎

201. https://disabilitystudies.nl/project/realisatie-inclusie-agenda-almere Accessed 20 April 2020. ↩︎

202. Complaints may be submitted in person, by telephone or online through https://discriminatie.nl/#/home Accessed 13 May 2020. ↩︎

203. A.L.M. Keirse, Mogelijkheden schadevoorkomingsplicht via aansprakelijkheidsrecht, Rapportage voor het Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu (‘Possibilities for damage prevention through liability law, Report for the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment’) (Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law 2016), p. 17. ↩︎

204. District Court Amsterdam, 13 March 2013, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2013:BZ4174, para 4.2 – 4.3. Also see: https://www.clientearth.org/the-urgenda-climate-case-and-access-to-justice-for-environmental-ngos-in-the-netherlands/ Accessed 5 June 2020. ↩︎

205. District court ’s-Hertogenbosch, 26 March 2009, ECLI:NL:RBSHE:2009:BH7428. ↩︎

206. Supreme Court 21 March 2003, ECLI:NL:HR:2003:AE8462 (Nitrate Directive), para 3.5. ↩︎

207. R.J.J. Eshuis, B.J. Diephuis, Factsheet 2018-1. Civiele Rechtspraak (Wetenschappelijk Onderzoeks- en Documentatiecentrum 2017), p.15. ↩︎

208. Data valid in 2020. Up to a fiscal annual income of 27,900 € (single income) or 39,400 € (family income). Above this annual income, persons are not eligible for legal aid. ↩︎

209. https://www.rechtsbijstand.nl/over-mediation-en-rechtsbijstand/hoeveel-moet-ik-zelf-betalen/inkomensnormen Accessed 6 July 2020. ↩︎

210. Supreme Court 31 January 1919, NJ 1919, 161 (Lindenbaum/Cohen) ↩︎

211. Article 6:101 (1) Civil Code: ‘If the damage is partly the result of a circumstance that can be attributed to the injured party, the obligation to pay compensation is reduced by distributing the damage between the injured party and the party liable to pay the compensation (…)’. ↩︎

212. Supreme Court 17 December 2010 (Peat Dike Wilnis) ECLI:NL:HR:2010:BN6236. ↩︎

213. Supreme Court 4 April 2014. (Falling cyclist) ECLI:NL:HR:2014:831, para 3.3. ↩︎

214. Supreme Court 5 November 1965, Kelderluik (Basement Latch),  ECLI:NL:HR:1965:AB7079. ↩︎

215. Supreme Court 27 May 1988, Veenbroei (Peat Scalding) ECLI:NL:HR:1988:AD0344. ↩︎

216. Supreme Court 28 May 2004, Jet blast, ECLI:NL:HR:2004:AO4224, para 3.4.3. ↩︎

217. The Supreme Court of the Netherlands is also the final appeal court for the Caribbean Netherlands. ↩︎

218. Articles 3.1 to 3.9 Spatial Planning Act. ↩︎

219. Article 8.2 Spatial Planning Act. See also: https://www.raadvanstate.nl/talen/artikel/ Accessed 15 May 2020. ↩︎

220. CROW, ASVV 2012. Aanbevelingen voor verkeersvoorzieningen binnen de bebouwde kom (publicatie 723) (‘ASVV 2012. Recommendations for traffic facilities in built-up areas (publication 723)’) (CROW 2012). ↩︎

221. Article 4.10 Utrecht Municipal Building Ordinance, Safety of aids and preventing nuisance. Section 2. It is forbidden to use tools or materials when carrying out construction or earthworks if this poses a risk to the surroundings. Section 3. The competent authority may prohibit the use of a tool that causes or can cause damage or serious nuisance to the environment. ↩︎

222. Almere Municipal Building Ordinance 2012: http://decentrale.regelgeving.overheid.nl/cvdr/xhtmloutput/Historie/Almere/CVDR256273/CVDR256273_2.html Accessed 18 May 2020. ↩︎

223. VNG Model General Municipal Ordinance, articles 2.10 and 2.11. ↩︎

224. Article 1:3 (3) Awb: 3. ‘An application is taken to mean: a request from an interested party to take a decision.’ ABRvS 18 February 2018, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:590 ↩︎

225. Act of 6 November 2019, Stb. 2019, 413, introducing article 5A Road Traffic Act: ‘It is prohibited for anyone to behave in traffic in such a way that the traffic rules are seriously violated if there is a danger to life or danger of serious bodily injury to another person’. ↩︎

226. Articles 176 and 177, Road Traffic Act. ↩︎

227. The amount of the traffic fines is adjusted annually. Given amounts are valid as of 1 January 2020. ↩︎

228. Appeal Court Arnhem-Leeuwarden 4 February 2019, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2019:981. ↩︎

229. Reglement verkeersregels en verkeerstekens 1990 (Regulation Traffic Regulations and Traffic Signs 1990) (RVV 1990) ↩︎

230. Article 92 RVV 1990. ↩︎

231. Article 5.1 RVV 1990: Cyclists use the mandatory bicycle path or the bicycle / moped path. 5.2. They use the road if there is no mandatory bicycle path or a bicycle / moped path. Article 6.1 RVV 1990: Moped riders use the bicycle / moped path. 6.2: They use the road when a bicycle / moped path is missing. ↩︎

232. Article 92.2 RVV 1990. ↩︎

233. Section 1 in conjunction with section 4, Road Traffic Act 1994 (Wegenverkeerswet 1994). The description of a ‘road’ has been further defined in case law: a road consists of traffic lanes that fulfil a function for the purpose of handling public traffic and which therefore by their nature or function serve a large, indefinite audience, ABRvS, 05 March 2008, ECLI:NL:RVS:2008:BC6035. ↩︎

234. Article 142 (1) and (3) Code of Criminal Procedure ↩︎

235. Chapter 6, Beleidsregels Buitengewoon Opsporingsambtenaar (‘Policy Regulation extraordinary investigating officer’). ↩︎

236. See chapter C3.2. ↩︎

237. Article 25 Roads Ordinance Province Utrecht, article 17.6 Environmental Ordinance Province Flevoland. ↩︎

238. https://vng.nl/artikelen/about-vng Accessed 29 May 2020. ↩︎

239. https://vng.nl/brieven/wijziging-model-apv-zomer-2019. Accessed 29 May 2020. ↩︎

240. See chapter A6.1 and A6.2. ↩︎

241. Article 125 APV Utrecht, article 6.1 APV Almere. ↩︎

242. Articles 126 and 126a APV Utrecht, Article 6.2 APV Almere. ↩︎

243. Articles 126 and 126a APV Utrecht, Article 6.2 APV Almere. ↩︎

244. Article 120 Provinces Act. ↩︎

245. Article 124 Municipalities Act. ↩︎

246. R. Kegge, Interbestuurlijk toezicht in de ruimtelijke ordening een juridisch onderzoek naar het nut en de noodzaak van de reactieve aanwijzing als toezichtinstrument in de ruimtelijke ordening (‘Interadministrative supervision in spatial planning. A legal study of the benefits and the necessity of the reactive instruction as a supervisory instrument in Dutch spatial planning’) (Stichting Instituut voor Bouwrecht 2015), p. 312. ↩︎

247. Article 3.8 subsection 6, and article 3.28 Spatial Planning Act. ↩︎

248. Article 3.26 Spatial Planning Act. ↩︎

249. Article 124 to 124h and 273a Municipalities Act, article 121 to article 121e Provinces Act. ↩︎

250. SWOV (2020). Road deaths in the Netherlands. SWOV Fact sheet, January 2020. SWOV, The Hague. https://www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures/factsheet/road-deaths-netherlands Accessed 12 June 2020. ↩︎

251. B. Olij and H. van der Does, Verkeersongevallen 2018, SEH-bezoeken. Rapport 818 (VeiligheidNL 2019), p.8. ↩︎

252. B. Olij and H. van der Does, Verkeersongevallen 2018, SEH-bezoeken. Rapport 818 (VeiligheidNL 2019), p.8. ↩︎

253. J.P. Schepers and R Methorst, Voetgangersveiligheid erkenning van onveiligheid, oorzaken en beleidsmogelijkheden (‘Pedestrian safety; exploration of the level of unsafety, its causes and policy options’). (SWOV 2012), p. 35. ↩︎

254. https://www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures/factsheet/30-kmh-zones Accessed 12 June 2020. ↩︎

255. Road users are obliged to follow instructions of traffic regulators: Article 182.1(d), RVV 1994. ↩︎

256. Article 59 Besluit administratieve bepalingen inzake het wegverkeer. ↩︎

257. http://www.kijkopkennis.nl/wp/2018/04/meer-verkeersveiligheid-door-shared-space/ Accessed 19 July 2020 ↩︎

258. https://www.kenniscentrumsharedspace.nl/English Accessed 19 July 2020 ↩︎

259. Michiel Maas, ‘Den Haag vindt shared space toch te gevaarlijk’, Binnenlands Bestuur, 17 July 2020. https://www.binnenlandsbestuur.nl/ruimte-en-milieu/nieuws/den-haag-vindt-shared-space-toch-te-gevaarlijk.13887968.lynkx Accessed 19 July 2020. ↩︎

260. Royal Dutch Visio, Shared spaces for blind and partially sighted people: a challenge for designers. Issues and advice for accessible public spaces (Royal Dutch Visio 2013), chapter A 1. ↩︎

261. M. de Lange CROW-Fietsberaadnotitie: Fietsdrukte op kruispunten: innovaties, pilots, kennis en ervaring. (CROW Fietsberaad 2019), p. 12. Also see footnote 50. ↩︎

262. Instruction of the Minister of Public Health, Welfare and Sports to the Safety Regions, 10 July 2020, reference no. 1720717-208077-PG. The legal basis of the emergency ordinances is article 7 Public Health Act. ↩︎

263. Oogvereniging, Koninklijke Visio, Bartiméus and Robert Coppes Stichting, Een toegankelijke anderhalvemetersamenleving. Praktische tips voor uw winkel, onderneming of (culturele) instelling (‘An accessible one-and-a-half-meter society. Practical tips for your shop, company or (cultural) institution’) (Oogvereniging 2020). Also see: https://iederin.nl/maak-de-anderhalvemetersamenleving-inclusief/ Accessed 20 July 2020 ↩︎

264. S. Schaap and M. Dijkshoorn, Reguleren van drukte in de openbare ruimte. Handreiking crowd management bij het verantwoord openstellen. (‘Regulating crowds in the public space. Guide for crowd management in responsible re-opening’) (Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenten 2020), p. 20, p. 41. https://vng.nl/sites/default/files/2020-06/vng-handreiking-crowmanagement.pdf Accessed 20 July 2020 ↩︎