NOS News•today, 04:59
The penalty that the Central Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers (COA) must pay because too many asylum seekers are staying in the registration center in Ter Apel today exceeds the limit of 1 million euros. This is evident from figures from the COA.
Last night, more than the permitted 2,000 people slept in the registration center again, says a COA spokesperson. The number will be announced on the site later today.
There have been more than 2,000 people in the registration center for several weeks. During the night from Tuesday to Wednesday, 2,338 people stayed, considerably more than the number allowed on the basis of the administrative agreement between the COA and the municipality of Westerwolde, where Ter Apel is located. The day before, there were already 2,327.
Discussion about the numbers
This week it was announced that COA will have to pay a fine in more days than expected. As a result, the counter until Thursday stands at 1,012,500 euros in penalty payments that the COA owes to the municipality.
It is not yet clear what the municipality will do with that money. The mayor and aldermen must come up with a plan for this, but that will not happen before the summer recess, thinks Gemeentebelangen Westerwolde, the largest party in the municipal council.
In January, the summary proceedings judge ordered COA to pay a penalty of 15,000 euros per day for every day that the number of people staying in the registration center exceeds 2,000, up to a maximum of 1.5 million euros. The fines had to be paid from February 22.
Between March 2 and 8, COA said it managed to keep the occupancy below 2,000. Discussion later arose about those figures, which led to a settlement. For those seven days, the COA only has to pay half a penalty.
After March 8, more than 2,000 people slept in the registration center every day, with regular peaks of more than 2,300. Marco Visscher, group leader of Gemeentebelangen Westerwolde, saw it coming. “We predicted this and so this does not surprise us. It is the sad reality.”
The flow is halting for “reasons that we have been mentioning for a long time,” says a COA spokesperson. “Last month, three large reception locations closed in Nijmegen, Biddinghuizen and Breda. In addition, some hotels and holiday parks are terminating temporary contracts for reception in connection with the tourist season that is starting again. Other contracts have expired and too few municipalities have offered new places.”
Mattress in waiting area
At the end of April, State Secretary Van der Burg wrote in a letter to the House of Representatives that people occasionally had to sleep on a mattress in the waiting area.
In Ter Apel, “nothing has changed” since the ruling, according to councilor Visscher. “The nuisance continues and the pressure on employees and refugees is and remains unacceptably high.”
It raises the question of how useful such a penalty is in a lawsuit between two government agencies. The COA is an executive organization of the Ministry of Justice. In essence, extra tax money now ends up with the municipality of Westerwolde via the COA.
Critics say the measure makes little difference because it is government money that is distributed in a different way. Also, 1.5 million euros would not hurt the COA – a total of 4.6 billion euros has been budgeted for asylum reception in 2024 -.
Make it open for discussion
Viola Bex-Reimert, associate professor of administrative law at Utrecht University, does not entirely agree with this. “A penalty makes the problem visible and that gives reason to make it open for discussion. That is why it is being discussed again in the House of Representatives and in the media. It also ends up in the COA budget and the Justice Department must be given political accountability for this. take.”
According to her, the fact that there is a ‘vest-pocket’ principle is not entirely true, because both bodies have different interests and also special responsibilities. “That is why it is perhaps even more important that a government organization can also be held accountable for this.”
She does not dare to say whether it would have helped if the penalty had been higher. “We now have to see whether it will help if the municipality goes to court again.”
If the penalty has reached the maximum of 1.5 million and has been paid, the municipality can still go to court to ask whether the amount of the penalty or the total amount can be adjusted. The municipality can also start a new lawsuit.
