STAY UP TO DATE: The Effects of the US Foreign Aid Freeze on Freedom House
Expanding Freedom and Democracy
Freedom on the Net 2025

Netherlands

Free
84
100
A Obstacles to Access 24 25
B Limits on Content 30 35
C Violations of User Rights 30 40
Last Year's Score & Status
83 100 Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free). See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
Netherlands_Hero-Map

header1 Key Developments, June 1, 2024 – May 31, 2025

Internet freedom in the Netherlands remained robust during the coverage period. The online environment was generally free, featuring high access rates and internet-regulation laws that were proportionate, specific, and protective of free expression. However, there were concerns about the scope of the state’s surveillance authority, which authorities have used to monitor activists.1

  • In February 2025, the Dutch Implementing Act, which transposed the European Union’s Digital Services Act into Dutch law, entered into force. The Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) officially became responsible for enforcing the Digital Services Act, which compels social media platforms and search engines to standardize content-removal processes, boost transparency, and bolster risk mitigation measures (A5 and B3).2
  • In October 2024, the Ministry of Justice and Security announced that the Netherlands would abstain from supporting the August 2024 version of the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation at the European Council, which would have posed threats to end-to-end encryption. The ministry had previously supported the regulation, which mandated that online platforms and messaging services install “upload filters” that scan the content of a message, including in end-to-end encrypted messaging applications, for child sexual abuse material (CSAM) (C4).3
  • The Temporary Cyber Operations Act, which is intended to bolster cybersecurity, came into force in July 2024.4 The act increased the surveillance powers of the General Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD) and the Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD), did not provide general protections against improper surveillance, and weakened oversight by replacing the necessity to get prior authorization from the Investigatory Powers Commission (TIB) for the deployment of certain powers (C5 and C8).5
  • In June 2024, ahead of the European Parliament elections, several Dutch political parties—including the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA), the far-right Party for Freedom (PVV,) and the far-right Forum for Democracy (FvD)—faced distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks against their websites. The pro-Russian HackNeT group claimed responsibility for the attacks on Telegram (C8).6

header2 Political Overview

The Netherlands is a parliamentary democracy with a strong record of safeguarding political rights and civil liberties. Asylum policies are a source of controversy, contributing to political and societal polarization. Corruption, prison conditions, and asylum policies are of concern on the six Caribbean islands for which the Netherlands government has varying degrees of responsibility.

This report has been abridged for Freedom on the Net 2025 due to ongoing budget constraints. Please consider making a donation to support future editions of this vital resource.

For additional background information, see last year’s full report.

A Obstacles to Access

A1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? 6.006 6.006
A2 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Is access to the internet prohibitively expensive or beyond the reach of certain segments of the population for geographical, social, or other reasons? 3.003 3.003
A3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the government exercise technical or legal control over internet infrastructure for the purposes of restricting connectivity? 6.006 6.006
A4 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? 5.005 6.006
A5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers and digital technology fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? 4.004 4.004

B Limits on Content

B1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the state block or filter, or compel service providers to block or filter, internet content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 4.004 6.006
B2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do state or nonstate actors employ legal, administrative, or other means to force publishers, content hosts, or digital platforms to delete content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 3.003 4.004
B3 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? 3.003 4.004
B4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do online journalists, commentators, and ordinary users practice self-censorship? 4.004 4.004
B5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a particular political interest? 3.003 4.004
B6 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are there economic or regulatory constraints that negatively affect users’ ability to publish content online? 3.003 3.003
B7 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? 4.004 4.004
B8 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do conditions impede users’ ability to mobilize, form communities, and campaign, particularly on political and social issues? 6.006 6.006

Score Change: The score improved from 5 to 6 because there were fewer reports that organizers were arrested due to content posted in online group chats.

C Violations of User Rights

C1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do the constitution or other laws fail to protect rights such as freedom of expression, access to information, and press freedom, including on the internet, and are they enforced by a judiciary that lacks independence? 5.005 6.006
C2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are there laws that assign criminal penalties or civil liability for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 2.002 4.004
C3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are individuals penalized for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 6.006 6.006
C4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the government place restrictions on anonymous communication or encryption? 4.004 4.004
C5 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on users’ right to privacy? 3.003 6.006
C6 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does monitoring and collection of user data by service providers and other technology companies infringe on users’ right to privacy? 4.004 6.006
C7 1.00-5.00 pts0-5 pts
Are individuals subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor in relation to their online activities? 4.004 5.005
C8 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individual users subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? 2.002 3.003

On Netherlands

See all data, scores & information on this country or territory.

See More

Country Facts

  • Population

    17,700,000

  • Global Freedom Score

    97 100 free

  • Internet Freedom Score

    84 100 free

  • Freedom in the World Status

    Free

  • Networks Restricted

    No

  • Websites Blocked

    Yes

  • Pro-government Commentators

    No

  • Users Arrested

    No