Press Release
The Council of State has ruled: Assimilation Policy will be Expanded

The Council of State, the advisory organ of the Dutch government, recently ruled that three asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Somalia whose applications have been rejected still have the right to asylum because they have adopted a “western lifestyle”. The Council of State, by their shocking statement, do not only set out new criteria for the asylum policy, it also shows that they are not an objective advisory organ.

Hanna Sevenster of the State Press Advisory makes this even clearer by saying that people westernize as a result of adhering to a religious or political conviction. She says, “If a woman has become less or no longer religious in The Netherlands or behaves western because of a political conviction, then a person like that could be persecuted and therefore has the right to asylum. An example of this is a woman who has turned away from her religion and behaves westernized as a result of that (...).

The same is true when their behavior is difficult to change. In The Netherlands a woman is used to look a man in the eye. This could get you into troubles in other countries.”

It is therefore remarkable that the discussion being held, as a result of this ruling, focuses particularly on the incompetent assimilation policy. Of which a lot is to be said of course, but it is not the core of the issue.

Is it not without question; that an important, independent advisory organ of the government that sets adopting the western lifestyle as a condition to be able to live in the Netherlands, should be challenged? Because they themselves go against the principles, of which they say they stand for, isn’t it? Like the so-called freedom of speech or the principle of equality regardless of faith, convictions or origins.

What they actually say is that when asylum seekers base their opinions and behavior on “western” norms they can count on an advantageous position during the asylum process. However, when asylum seekers for example, base their opinions and behavior on Islamic norms they will not be eligible for asylum. Even though these two types of asylum seekers share the same background. Isn’t this applying double standards? Isn’t the “western” opinion given the precedence, while the Islamic opinion is being attacked? Where is this so-called freedom of speech which they hold in such a high esteem, so much so that they give you a permit of residency because of it? What message do they actually send across to the new souls that have joined their ranks? That you will be rewarded for adopting the liberal viewpoint and its freedoms, all the while the people no longer believe in them themselves.

In summary, if one distances himself from Islam he will be considered westernized and will be allowed to stay, even if he, (actually) does not have the right to. Is such an approach not abusing the weak position of asylum seekers who are cunningly seduced to distance themselves from their norms and values just to be accepted? Isn’t this oppression?

The absence of a principal discussion in the Netherlands shows that the assimilation policy against the Muslims reached a stage in which they trample their own ideology and resort to oppression.

People have begun to believe in their own false propaganda about the newcomers, that the mass immigration from Muslim lands will bring about a wave of Islamization and that they, in the long term, will be a threat to the democratic order and freedoms in the Netherlands.

Okay Pala
Media Representative of Hizb ut Tahrir in The Netherlands