Key takeaways
As a landlord, you may face the administrative closure of your property – even if you had no knowledge of any criminal activity. Civil liability does not follow automatically from a closure order: the court weighs all circumstances of the case. The Bibob screening process applies not only to permits and licences, but also to real estate transactions involving public authorities. Citizens and businesses have robust legal remedies: administrative objection, appeal, and interim relief. Data sharing between public authorities is strictly regulated; you have rights of access and objection.
Anyone following the news cannot escape it: organised crime, drug trafficking, the ‘undermining’ of the rule of law. These terms have become part of everyday public debate in the Netherlands. But what do they actually mean – and more importantly, what do they mean for you? Not for the suspect or the criminal, but for the entrepreneur looking to open a restaurant, the landlord who rents out a property, the resident living in a neighbourhood where criminal networks are active.
The reality is that the fight against organised crime now reaches deep into the daily lives of people who have done nothing wrong. Properties are closed down, permits refused, personal data shared between government agencies. This article explains how that approach works in legal terms – along the lines of criminal law, administrative law, civil law and privacy law – and what you as a citizen or business owner can do if you are affected.
I. Criminal Law: When Does Collaboration Become a Crime?
The undermining of the rule of law begins with the entanglement of the criminal world and the legitimate economy. Criminals seek out lawful structures to conceal illegal activities or launder proceeds. A hospitality business can serve as a vehicle for washing drug money. A transport company may be used for the transit of narcotics. A real estate portfolio can function as a buffer for criminal assets. The defining feature of this type of crime is precisely that it looks legitimate at first glance.
For the criminal law response, Article 140 of the Dutch Criminal Code is the central instrument. This provision criminalises participation in a criminal organisation. What makes it particularly powerful is that the network itself is criminalised, independently of the individual offences committed. This makes it possible to pursue those who facilitate the criminal infrastructure without themselves transporting drugs or committing violence: the accountant, the driver, the person renting out a warehouse.
The legislature has also granted police and prosecutors far-reaching powers to investigate organised crime. Undercover agents may be deployed, communications may be intercepted, and systematic surveillance is permitted. These methods do not only affect suspects – people in their immediate environment, business partners or fellow tenants may also come into view during investigations. An awareness of these rules is therefore relevant for legitimate entrepreneurs as well.
II. Administrative Law: Your Property Closed, Your Permit Refused
Administrative Closure: A Powerful Instrument
The most visible instrument in the fight against organised crime is the administrative closure of premises. Under Article 13b of the Opium Act – commonly referred to as the Damocles Act – a mayor may close a residential or commercial property when drugs intended for sale, delivery or supply are found on the premises. This is an administrative measure, not a criminal one: no conviction is required as a prerequisite.
What makes this instrument so far-reaching is that it can also affect the owner or landlord of a property – even if they had no knowledge of what was taking place there. A landlord who rents an apartment to a tenant running a small drug operation may suddenly find themselves confronted with a closure order, lost rental income and potential liability claims. The question of whether they could have prevented it only arises later – during the objection or appeal stage.
The Principle of Proportionality: More Than a Formality
The law grants mayors discretionary authority: they may order a closure, but are not always required to do so. The administrative court reviews whether the mayor could reasonably have reached the decision, with the principle of proportionality at the centre of the analysis. That principle requires that the measure must be suitable, necessary and proportionate – in relation to the seriousness of the violation, the circumstances of the person affected, and the public interest being served.
For a long time it was assumed that the court would only review closure orders with a light touch. Recent case law, however, shows a shift towards a more active and substantive review. In ECLI:NL:RVS:2025:2922 and ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:475, the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State emphasised that the interests of the person affected – personal circumstances, degree of culpability, consequences of the closure – must be actively weighed. An owner who demonstrably had no knowledge of the criminal activity and actively exercised oversight is in a very different legal position from one who ignored warning signs.
Your Legal Remedies Against a Closure Order
If you receive a closure order, the first step is to lodge an objection with the mayor. That may sound like a formality, but the objection procedure gives you the opportunity to set out your personal circumstances, your oversight efforts and any relevant facts in full. If the objection is rejected, you can appeal to the administrative court under Article 6:13 of the General Administrative Law Act (Awb).
In urgent situations – and a closure is almost always urgent – you can simultaneously request an interim injunction from the preliminary relief judge (Article 8:81 Awb). That judge can suspend the enforcement of the order pending a final ruling. In practice this is an important tool for landlords and property owners: a closure can last for weeks and cause serious financial and reputational damage. The ability to limit that damage while the main proceedings are ongoing is valuable.
The Bibob Screening: Not Just for Permits
Alongside the closure power, the authorities have another instrument that is often underestimated: the Bibob Act (Act on the promotion of decisions on integrity assessments by public authorities). This legislation allows public bodies to refuse or withdraw permits, subsidies and contracts if there is a serious risk that they will be abused for criminal purposes or to launder criminal proceeds. Anyone applying for a hospitality licence in a municipality that applies Bibob policy may be asked to provide extensive financial and business information.
What is less well known is that Bibob screening can also apply to real estate transactions in which a public authority is party: the purchase of municipal property, leasehold arrangements, or the lease of premises from a government-owned entity. For entrepreneurs who are active in the real estate market or who have expansion plans involving publicly owned property, this aspect deserves explicit attention.
III. Civil Law: The Legal Position of the Landlord
Termination of the Lease Agreement
When the mayor orders the closure of a property, this has immediate consequences for the lease agreement. Under Article 7:231(2) of the Dutch Civil Code, the landlord may terminate the lease extrajudicially as soon as the property has been closed by administrative order on grounds of a serious disturbance of public order. Notably, no failure to perform on the part of the tenant is required: the closure order itself serves as sufficient legal basis. The landlord does not need to wait for the order to become final and unappealable, as confirmed in ECLI:NL:GHARL:2023:1291.
That said, the termination must be proportionate and must not be unacceptable under standards of reasonableness and fairness. In cases involving minor violations or exceptional personal circumstances on the part of the tenant, a court may still intervene.
Liability: Nuance is Required
A closure order does not automatically give rise to civil liability for the landlord. This is a point that is frequently lost in reporting about organised crime. The court assesses all circumstances of the case: did the landlord know about the criminal use of the property, and if not, should they reasonably have known? Did they exercise adequate oversight, and did they respond appropriately to warning signs?
Case law from the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State makes clear that landlords are expected to meet an active duty of care. Simply stating that you knew nothing is not enough – the court expects that you also took actual measures to prevent misuse (ECLI:NL:RVS:2023:579; ECLI:NL:RVS:2022:2443). A landlord who carefully screened the tenant, carried out periodic inspections and responded in writing to complaints is in a considerably stronger position than one who did nothing after signing the lease.
If the landlord falls short in their duty of care, they may be held liable for lost rental income, repair costs and other losses under Article 6:74 of the Dutch Civil Code. Third-party liability may also arise – for example towards neighbours who suffer harm as a result of criminal activity on the premises – under Article 6:174 Civil Code (liability for defective premises) or the general tort provision of Article 6:162 Civil Code.
What Can You Do as a Landlord?
The question we hear most from landlords is: how do I limit my risk? The answer lies in a combination of careful screening at the outset, active oversight during the tenancy and thorough documentation of everything you do and undertake.
At the start of the tenancy relationship, that begins with carefully verifying the identity, income and background of the tenant. The Good Landlordship Act requires landlords to use objective selection criteria and to be transparent in the selection process. If you have doubts about the authenticity of documents, follow up with the relevant authorities and request references. Document your screening process in writing: if a dispute ever arises, documentation is your best defence.
Oversight does not end there. Periodic inspections – provided they are contractually grounded and carried out proportionately, since the tenant’s right to privacy is equally protected – give you the opportunity to recognise signs of misuse in time. Always respond to complaints from neighbours in writing and with care. If there are concrete indications of criminal activity, send a written notice of default to the tenant and seek legal advice promptly. The earlier you act, the less likely you are to be dragged into administrative or civil proceedings.
Finally, a note on contractual protection. Anti-misuse clauses in the lease agreement are sensible, but a general exemption clause by which you seek to exclude all liability for criminal activities by the tenant will only hold up in court to a limited extent. The Supreme Court has consistently held that exclusion clauses cannot be invoked in cases of gross negligence or intent (ECLI:NL:HR:2021:153). A qualified lawyer can help you draft clauses that provide genuine protection and that will withstand judicial scrutiny.
IV. Privacy: Data Sharing and Your Rights
Combating organised crime requires cooperation between agencies: municipalities, police, the Public Prosecution Service, the Tax Authority, the FIOD (Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service) and other bodies exchange information to build a complete picture of criminal networks. That cooperation is indispensable, but it also carries risks for the privacy of citizens who – sometimes unjustifiably – have come into view.
The sharing of personal data between public authorities is strictly regulated. The applicable frameworks are the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Dutch Implementation Act (UAVG), the Police Data Act (Wpg) and the Bibob Act. Data may only be shared if there is a clear legal basis for doing so and the processing is necessary and proportionate. Police data may only be disclosed to other agencies in cases of overriding public interest (Article 19 Wpg) or within designated cooperation arrangements targeting organised crime (Article 20 Wpg). Data sharing can never be a routine administrative act: every disclosure requires a concrete and demonstrable justification.
If you believe that your personal data has been processed or shared unlawfully, you have a broad range of legal remedies at your disposal. You may request access to your data under Article 15 GDPR, request correction or erasure, and object to the processing. If that does not produce the desired result, you can file a complaint with the Dutch Data Protection Authority or appeal to the administrative court. The court reviews strictly whether the data sharing was lawful and whether your interests were adequately safeguarded (ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:903; ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:746)
Conclusion: Organised Crime Is Everyone’s Business
The fight against organised crime and the undermining of the rule of law is no longer a matter confined to the fringes of society, far removed from the law-abiding entrepreneur or ordinary tenant. The instruments the authorities deploy – administrative closures, Bibob screenings, integrated data sharing – affect people who have done nothing wrong. In many cases that is also the intention: the government wants to prevent legitimate structures from being abused, and a certain degree of scrutiny and oversight is unavoidable for that purpose.
That does not mean, however, that the law leaves you unprotected. Proportionality and reasonableness are not empty words on paper, but enforceable standards against which decisions are reviewed. The court looks at your personal circumstances, your conduct, your efforts. Those who have their affairs in order – careful screening, active oversight, thorough documentation – are in a fundamentally different legal position from those who do not.
Are you facing a closure order, a Bibob investigation, or questions about your liability as a landlord? Do not wait. Objection and appeal deadlines are short, and timely legal advice can make the difference between a successful defence and an irreversible decision that affects your business or property for years to come.
Do you have questions about your legal position?
The criminal law and real estate lawyers at Law & More are here to advise you on property closures, Bibob screenings, landlord duties of care and data sharing issues. Whether you are a landlord, a business owner, or simply want to understand what an administrative decision means for you personally – we are ready to help. Get in touch at lawandmore.eu.
Relevant legislation: Article 140 Criminal Code • Article 13b Opium Act • Article 7:231 Civil Code • Article 6:74 Civil Code • Article 6:174 Civil Code • Article 6:162 Civil Code • GDPR • Police Data Act • Bibob Act • Good Landlordship Act • General Administrative Law Act (Awb)
