The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Digital welfare fraud detection and the Dutch SyRI judgment
Open accessAbstract
In 2020, a Dutch court passed judgment in a case about a digital welfare fraud detection system called Systeem Risico Indicatie (SyRI). The court ruled that the SyRI legislation is unlawful because it does not comply with the right to privacy under the European Convention of Human Rights. In this article we analyse the judgment and its implications. This ruling is one of first in which a court has invalidated a welfare fraud detection system for breaching the right to privacy. We show that the immediate effects of the judgment are limited. The judgment does not say much about automated fraud detection systems in general, because it is limited to the circumstances of the case. Still, the judgment is important. The judgment reminds policymakers that fraud detection must happen in a way that respects data protection principles and the right to privacy. The judgment also confirms the importance of transparency if personal data are used.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Van Bekkum and Zuiderveen Borgesius therefore note that its immediate legal implications are limited, even though it confirms the importance of transparency, dataprotection principles and effective rights review in digital welfare administration (Van Bekkum and Zuiderveen Borgesius, 2021).”
From Human-centric AI governance in the European Union. Accountability, fundamental rights, and institutional resilience in public administration (2026) · cites this paper as Van Bekkum and Zuiderveen Borgesius, 2021
In the citing paper
“Current international and national law does not establish legally binding requirements for XAI in tax, 173 but some soft law instruments engage with matters of AI and explanation, which are scrutinized in section 4.2.”
From Towards eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in Tax Law: The Need for a Minimum Legal Standard (2022) · cites this paper as [173]
In the citing paper
“Current international and national law does not establish legally binding requirements for XAI in tax, 173 but some soft law instruments engage with matters of AI and explanation, which are scrutinized in section 4.2.”
From Towards eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in Tax Law: The Need for a Minimum Legal Standard (2022) · cites this paper as [173]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor
Lebovits, H. (2018) · Public Integrity · doi:10.1080/10999922.2018.1511671 · Cited by 3,320 · cited 1×
“Indeed, large-scale data processing for fraud detection creates a risk of discriminating against certain groups (see, from a US perspective, (Eubanks, 2018).”
The Emergence of Personal Data Protection as a Fundamental Right of the EU
Fuster, G. G. (2014) · Law, governance and technology series · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05023-2 · Cited by 295 · cited 1×
“…Authority (College Bescherming Persoonsgegevens), 2014) and the Dutch Council of State (which provides advice on legal Bills) (Raad van State (Council of State), 2014) both criticised the proposed SyRI system, because the proposals hardly limited the amount of personal data that could be collected.”
Data Protection in the Case Law of Strasbourg and Luxemburg: Constitutionalisation in Action
Hert, P. D., & Gutwirth, S. (2009) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9498-9_1 · Cited by 137 · cited 1×
“That court had to be so creative in cases regarding personal data processing because the Convention, which dates back to 1950, does not include a separate right to the protection of personal data (De Hert and Gutwirth, 2009: 24–25).”
Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J. (2016) · Computer Law & Security Review · doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2015.12.013 · Cited by 108 · cited 1×
“See, for more detail on pseudonymous data, Zuiderveen Borgesius, 2016.”
Self-citationThe Right Not to Be Subject to Automated Decisions Based on Profiling
Mendoza, I., & Bygrave, L. (2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-64955-9_4 · Cited by 80 · cited 4×
“As noted, the court also discussed Article 22 GDPR, the provision on automated decision-making.”
InfluentialFundamental Rights in Digital Welfare States: The Case of SyRI in the Netherlands
Bekker, S. (2020) · Netherlands yearbook of international law · doi:10.1007/978-94-6265-403-7_24 · Cited by 74 · cited 1×
“Moreover, there has not been much academic writing on the judgment in English (other scholarly publications about the judgment in English are: Meuwese, 2020; Bekker, 2021; Wieringa, 2021).”
Gantchev, V. (2019) · European Journal of Social Security · doi:10.1177/1388262719838109 · Cited by 68 · cited 1×
“6 The Dutch Parliament adopted the SyRI legislation without debate (for more details about the SyRI history, see Gantchev, 2019: 17; Jansen and Reijneveld, 2020; Wieringa, 2021).”
Improving Privacy Protection in the area of Behavioural TargetingPreprint
Borgesius, F. Z. (2015) · arXiv.org · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2654213 · Cited by 27
Self-citationNoot bij: Rb. Den Haag 05 februari 2020, JB, JB, 2020, 63 (SyRI-wetgeving in strijd met het EVRM)
Jansen, R. H. T., & Reijneveld (2020) · Jurisprudentie Bestuursrecht · Cited by 1
Activity Trackers: Unrealized Promise
(2017) · The Back Letter · doi:10.1097/01.back.0000526795.58565.95 · Cited by 1
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Besselink LFM (2012) Constitutional Adjudication in the Era of Globalization: The Netherlands in Comparative Perspective. European Public Law. Alphen aan den Rijn The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International: 231–245. Available at: http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/api/Product/CitationPDFURL?file=Journals\EURO\EURO2012013.pdf. · DOI
- Gantchev V (2021) SyRI en zijn rechtsopvolger de WGS: Oude wijn in nieuwe zakken [Syri and its legal successor the WGS: old wine in new bottles]. Tijdschrift Recht en Arbeid 4.
- Jansen RHT, Reijneveld MD (2020) SyRI-wetgeving in strijd met het EVRM’ [SyRI legislation breaches the ECHR]. Jurisprudentie Bestuursrecht 4: 371–405.
- Meuwese A (2020) Regulating algorithmic decision-making one case at the time. A note on the Dutch ‘SyRI’ judgment 1(1): 209–211.
- Wieringa MA (2021) ‘Hey SyRI, tell me about algorithmic accountability: The lessons we can learn from an existing algorithmic system’ in Approaching algorithmic account(-)ability: developing tools to foster formalized and practical transparency in municipal data projects [Doctoral dissertation in preparation, Utrecht University, Utrecht].
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Algorithms in the court: does it matter which part of the judicial decision-making is automated?
Barysė, D., & Sarel, R. (2023) · Artificial Intelligence and Law · doi:10.1007/s10506-022-09343-6 · Cited by 124
“SyRI was challenged by civil rights organizations in the District Court of The Hague, which then ruled that the technology violates the right to privacy (van Bekkum and Borgesius 2021; Buijsman and Veluwenkamp 2022).”
Newman, J., & Mintrom, M. (2023) · Journal of European Public Policy · doi:10.1080/13501763.2023.2193223 · Cited by 47
“…Committee of Jurists for Human Rights) and two famous Dutch authors was formed to sue the government for its use of the SyRI system, and an amicus brief was also submitted to the Dutch court against the use of the SyRI system from an o ffi cial in the United Nations (van Bekkum & Borgesius, 2021).”
BackgroundMethodThe implosion of the Dutch surveillance welfare state
Fenger, M., & Simonse, R. (2024) · Social Policy & Administration · doi:10.1111/spol.12998 · Cited by 46
Mökander, J., & Schroeder, R. (2024) · Social Science Computer Review · doi:10.1177/08944393241235175 · Cited by 54
Gestel, R. V., Goedemé, T., Janssens, J., Lefevere, E., & Lemkens, R. (2022) · Journal of Social Policy · doi:10.1017/s004727942100088x · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- van Bekkum, M., & Borgesius, F. Z.
- Affiliations
- Radboud University
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Borgesius, Frederik Zuiderveen
- Venue
- European Journal of Social Security
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2021-08-02
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 323-340
- ISSN
- 1388-2627 (ISSN-L)
- 2399-2948
- OpenAlex
- W3188403602
- Cited by
- 108
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 39 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 8
- FWCI
- 74.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- European Journal of Social Security (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Legal and Labor Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- SyRI, right to privacy, European Convention on Human Rights, automated decision-making, personal data protection, transparency, data protection principles, judicial decisions, social security benefits
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
