On January 22, 2025, the Dutch District Court in The Hague (Rechtbank Den Haag) held that the Dutch government acted unlawfully by failing to meet the national statutory nitrogen targets set for 2025 and 2030, and ordered it to reduce nitrogen emissions.
Specifically, the court ordered the government to bring 50% of the nitrogen-sensitive nature in Dutch Natura 2000 areas, which are special nature protection areas designated under European Union (EU) law, below the nitrogen critical deposition value (CDV) by December 31, 2030, at the latest. The CDV expresses how much nitrogen may be deposited onto nature per year without causing significant damage. The court said that priority must be given to the areas that require the greatest care and are on the “urgent list.”
The court ordered the government to implement the judgment immediately. If the government does not meet the nitrogen target for 2030, it must pay a penalty of 10 million euros (about US$10.5 million) to the plaintiff, Greenpeace Netherlands.
EU and Dutch Legal Framework
The EU Birds Directive and the EU Habitats Directive obligate EU member states to conserve or restore nature in Natura 2000 areas and prevent them from deteriorating. (Habitats Directive, art. 6, paras. 1, 2; Birds Directive, art. 3 paras. 1, 2.) The pace and means to achieve these obligations are up to the member states. (Decision, para. 3.11.) The directives were implemented into Dutch national law in the Nature Conservation Act (Wet natuurbescherming), now replaced by the Environmental Act (Omgevingswet). In 2021, the Nitrogen Reduction and Nature Improvement Act (Wet stikstofreductie en natuurverbetering) amended the Nature Conservation Act and introduced a nitrogen reduction target of at least 40% of the surface area of the nitrogen-sensitive nature areas within the Natura 2000 network compared to the CDV by 2025. For 2030 and 2035, the goals were set at 50% and 74%, respectively.
Facts
Harmful nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands have increased significantly since the 1950s due to industrialization, increased road traffic, and growing livestock population. They are deposited in the soil and crops via the air, causing nitrogen-sensitive plants to disappear or deteriorate and biodiversity to decrease. (Decision, paras. 3.1-3.3.) The Dutch government has designated 162 Natura 2000 areas in the Netherlands. Many of them are sensitive to nitrogen deposition. CDVs have been established for these areas based on established European principles. (Decision, para. 3.8.)
Between 2015 and 2019, the Dutch government followed the Nitrogen Action Program (Programma Aanpak Stikstof, PAS), which provided for generic reduction and restoration measures. Based on the PAS, permission was given for activities that could be harmful for nitrogen-sensitive areas in anticipation of the future positive effects of the PAS measures. However, in 2019, the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Dutch Council of State (Raad van State), the country’s highest general administrative court, declared that the PAS could not provide a basis to authorize activities, because it did not provide sufficient guarantees for nature conservation and restoration in Nature 2000 areas as required by the Habitats Directive. (Para. 3.15.) Subsequent governments created new laws and policies, such as the establishment of reduction targets in the Nitrogen Reduction and Nature Improvement Act in 2021, formulated a National Rural Area Program (Nationaal Programma Landelijk Gebied, NPLG), and established a transition fund in which 24.3 billion euros (about US$25 billion) would be made available until 2035. (Para. 3.16-3.21.) The government that took office in July 2024 announced the reversal of some of those policies, including the transition fund and the NPLG, and enacted new policies. (Para. 3.25.)
Greenpeace initiated proceedings against the government and alleged that it violated the EU Habitats Directive and Birds Directive by not doing enough to prevent nitrogen deposition and failing to meet the statutory nitrogen reduction targets. As evidence, it submitted several environmental studies that found that nitrogen deposition in almost all Natura 2000 areas is a major cause of the deterioration of nature and that immediate action was necessary in areas on the “urgent list.” (Paras. 3.48, 4.1, 4.2.)
Decision
The court granted the application of Greenpeace and held that the government acted unlawfully. It emphasized that while it was not up to the court to prescribe political choices or order the legislature to enact specific legislation, a court could assess whether the government and parliament complied with laws they are bound by. (Paras. 5.3, 5.6, 5.7.)
The court opined that Greenpeace had presented sufficient scientific evidence of the continued deterioration of the Natura 2000 areas due to nitrogen deposition. (Paras. 5.24, 5.25.) The court concluded that the measures taken by the government were insufficient to prevent or reverse the deterioration of the habitats and living areas on the “urgent list” and did not meet the requirements of the Habitats Directive. (Paras. 5.27, 5.28.) The court further held that the government must ensure that programs, such as the PAS, are not contrary to legal obligations. (Paras. 5.31, 5.32.)
The court stated that the government must be held to its own legislation and meet the statutory nitrogen targets as a minimum target to comply with the Habitats Directive. Priority must be given to areas on the urgent list. (Para. 5.49, 5.63.)
Reactions
In reaction to the decision, the Dutch government stated that it would form a ministerial committee to study the ruling and its implementation. It has not yet decided whether it will appeal the ruling.
Jenny Gesley, Law Library of Congress
February 5, 2025
Read more Global Legal Monitor articles.