The coronavirus curfew in the Netherlands must be lifted, a Dutch court has ruled after arguing that no emergency situation exists and that the restrictions on movement are an unnecessary burden on people. The Netherlands have been under a 9pm to 5.30am curfew since January 23, which the government says is necessary to suppress the spread of the coronavirus. However, the restrictions were unpopular and prompted several nights of rioting shortly after they were implemented. A protest group, whose name translates to "Truth about the Virus" filed a legal complaint seeking to have them halted. The ruling on Tuesday calls for the curfew's immediate end. The Dutch government argued it had the right to implement the curfew because of emergency laws passed by the legislature giving it powers to act unilaterally. But, aside from stating there is no emergency, the court in The Hague argued that the restrictions place too many limits on the right to personal movement and interfere too heavily with an individual's personal situation. Australian Associated Press
A Dutch coronavirus curfew sparked several nights of rioting after they were implemented.
The coronavirus curfew in the Netherlands must be lifted, a Dutch court has ruled after arguing that no emergency situation exists and that the restrictions on movement are an unnecessary burden on people.
The Netherlands have been under a 9pm to 5.30am curfew since January 23, which the government says is necessary to suppress the spread of the coronavirus.
However, the restrictions were unpopular and prompted several nights of rioting shortly after they were implemented.
A protest group, whose name translates to "Truth about the Virus" filed a legal complaint seeking to have them halted.
The ruling on Tuesday calls for the curfew's immediate end.
The Dutch government argued it had the right to implement the curfew because of emergency laws passed by the legislature giving it powers to act unilaterally.
But, aside from stating there is no emergency, the court in The Hague argued that the restrictions place too many limits on the right to personal movement and interfere too heavily with an individual's personal situation.
Australian Associated Press
Follow us
Ad blocker issue
Your ad blocker may be preventing you from
being able to log in or subscribe.
