Receiving Countries
The Netherlands
The Joustra Commission was established in the Netherlands in 2019 to examine the role of the Dutch government in intercountry adoptions between 1967 and 1998. It was initiated by the Minister for Legal Protection, Sander Dekker, in response to mounting political and societal pressure. On the one hand, a growing body of evidence, highlighted through investigative journalism and media reports, revealed widespread illegal practices in several sending countries from which Dutch couples adopted children. On the other hand, adoptees and advocacy groups, including Shapla (Bangladeshi adoptees) and Plan Angel (Colombian adoptees), increasingly demanded transparency, access to official records, and accountability. Their efforts brought forward indications that Dutch authorities had been aware of irregularities and may have played a role in enabling illegal intercountry adoptions. With the establishment of the Joustra Commission, the Netherlands became the first receiving country to launch a state-initiated, comprehensive investigation into its historical intercountry adoption practices.
The Commission was tasked with assessing the role of the Dutch state in adoptions from Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia and Sri Lanka, between 1967 and 1998.
Based on the Minister’s assignment, the Commission formulated three main questions:
- “What was the extent of abuses related to intercountry adoptions in which adoptees were brought to the Netherlands?”
- “To what extent were the Dutch government and intermediaries aware of and involved in potential abuses, and how did they respond to signals of abuses?
- What lessons can be learned from the past, and how can the Dutch government and intermediaries support adoptees who experience problems due to the way in which their adoption was conducted?”
The focus was therefore on the system of intercountry adoption, rather than on individual or specific cases. The Commission gathered information through interviews, document and literature research and a questionnaire survey. In addition, on-site research was carried out in Sri Lanka and Colombia. The final report was published in 2021.
The report revealed systemic abuses within the intercountry adoption system from the mentioned countries, including abduction and purchase of children, bribery and document falsification. It identified serious structural problems throughout the entire period investigated, caused by a combination of factors, operating both in the countries of origin and in the Netherlands. The report also shed light on the actors involved and their responsibilities and confirmed that Dutch government bodies were aware of the abuses but did not take appropriate measures to prevent them. In particular, oversight of intermediaries was minimal and there was no effective system of checks and balances in place. The Commission concluded that the government and intermediaries, who were supposed to act in the best interest of the child, failed to establish adequate safeguards against abuses, either through procedural regulations or through effective supervision and control. The report claimed that abused continued to take place after 1998, when the Netherlands ratified the Hague Adoption Convention.
Political and policy responses[1]
The findings of the 2021 report led to the immediate suspension of intercountry adoptions in February 2021. The Minister for Legal Protection apologised publicly to adoptees, birth families and adoptive parents who had been harmed by these practices. Following this, authorities began exploring a fundamental reform of the system, although the committee expressed doubts about the feasibility of creating “a realistic alternative system,” since all previous attempts to reduce abuses had failed.
After an initial full suspension, intercountry adoptions were authorised again, at the end of 2022 by Franc Weerwind, which succeeded Dekker as Minister for Legal Protection. It was established that adoptions would be possible only from sending countries which respected the subsidiarity principle, set up a youth protection system that sufficiently supported and tried to keep families together, and whose adoption placement procedures were transparent. As a result, it was decided to continue adoptions from the Philippines, Hungary, Lesotho, Taiwan, Thailand, Bulgaria, Portugal and South Africa. In May 2024, the Dutch parliament announced that intercountry adoption would be phased out entirely over a period of six years, after accepting a motion by the Socialistische Partij (SP), which had already showed doubts after the re-authorisation of intercountry adoption in 2022. The reform plan was consequently abandoned and never actually put into practice. As a result, no new adoptions are currently being accepted.
The House justified its decision on the grounds that intercountry adoption no longer seems a safe solution for protecting children’s best interests. Moreover, due to the decision to end intercountry adoption, the government announced that adapted laws and regulations will need to replace the Placement of Foreign Children for Adoption Act (Wet opneming buitenlandse kinderen ter adoptie). This new Act is expected to come into force by the end of the phase-out period.[2]
In January 2026, the Dutch government announced that a legislative proposal had been prepared to phase out intercountry adoptions and facilitate restoration for adoptees. The proposal provides for a gradual termination of intercountry adoption, with a complete stop planned by the end of 2030. New applications from prospective adoptive parents will no longer be accepted once the law enters into force, while ongoing procedures may continue with strict safeguards until the phase-out deadline. The proposal also includes measures to support adoptees, such as improved access to adoption records and simplified procedures to change first and last names as part of identity restoration.
The resurfacing of evidence that possible illegalities could have taken place during intercountry adoptions, led adoptees to initiate legal proceedings against the Dutch state requesting compensation. One of the first cases concerns Dilani Butink, a Sri-Lankan adoptee which initiated proceedings against the Dutch state and the adoption agency involved in her unlawful adoption. The plaintiff claimed that her adoption documents were unreliable and that authorities in the Netherlands were aware of the abusive practices taking place in her birth-country. Her claim was that the Dutch state and the adoption agency failed to ensure that her adoption was in her own best interest. The claim was rejected by the District Court of The Hague in 2020 because it was time-barred. The plaintiff appealed and the Court of Appeal in The Hague, in 2022, ruled in her favour, requesting the Dutch state to pay compensation on the basis that it had failed to exercise adequate oversight.[3] However, in 2024, the Supreme Court referred the case back to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam for reassessment, especially in relation to the conduct of the intermediary organisation involved in her adoption.[4]
In 2021, Patrick Noordhoven, which had been illegally adopted from Brazil in the 1980s, sued the Dutch state arguing that it had failed to make sure that he was able to know his origin. He was adopted by a Dutch couple in Brazil, which did not follow the prescribed rules, adopting him on the street from the staff of an orphanage. The plaintiff also started legal proceedings against his adoptive parents, which did not provide him with information about his adoption.[5] He won the case against his adoptive parents, and claimed that the Dutch state had wrongfully facilitated or failed to prevent the illegal adoption and did too little to safeguard information about his origins. In 2021, the District Court in The Hague, ruled in his favour, acknowledging that the Dutch state had violated his rights by failing to assist him in uncovering his true parentage following his illegal adoption. In 2024, the Court of Appeal of The Hague reversed the previous decision, stating that the state did not act unlawfully, as the responsibility for the illegal adoption laid primarily with the adoptive parents and others directly involved.[6]
In September 2023, a Bangladeshi adoptee filed a lawsuit against the adoption agencies (Wereldkinderen Foundation and Terre des Hommes) and the Dutch state for their roles in her unlawful adoption, claiming damages. The woman was brought to the Netherlands as a child in 1976, together with her brother. She claimed that a man working for the above-mentioned adoption agencies induced her biological mother to give her up for adoption under false pretences. The District Court of The Hague, and the Court of Appeal, ruled that her claims against the adoption agencies were time-barred and that the state did not act unlawfully.[7]
In July 2024, Sam van den Haak along with seven other Sri Lankan adoptees filed a collective lawsuit against the Dutch state. Their adoption took place in the 1980s through the Flash Foundation, an independent Dutch adoption intermediary. The eight adoptees claimed that the Dutch government failed to intervene, even though it was aware of the ongoing abuses in intercountry adoptions from Sri Lanka. They requested the government to acknowledge its negligence and to reimburse them the costs they endured in tracing back their origins.[8] The Court ruled that the state was not liable, despite the documented irregularities. The plaintiffs have appealed and the case remains ongoing.[9]
The ongoing and past legal proceedings demonstrate that it remains unclear whether and under which circumstances the Dutch state can be held legally responsible for past illegal intercountry adoptions. They also reveal the extent to which Dutch courts continue to struggle with the complexity of this issue, as reflected in inconsistent case law.
______________
[1] Reuters, ‘Dutch freeze international adoptions after abuses uncovered’ (Al Jazeera English, 8 February 2021) <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/2/8/dutch-freeze-international-adoptions-after-abuses-uncovered> accessed 8 November 2025.
[2] ‘Careful phasing-out of intercountry adoption over six years’ (Government of the Netherlands, 9 December 2024) <https://www.government.nl/latest/news/2024/12/09/careful-phasing-out-of-inter-country-adoption-over-six-years> accessed 8 November 2025.
[3] ‘Onrechtmatig gehandeld bij Sri Lankaanse adoptiezaak’ (de Rechtspraak, 12 July 2022) <https://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie-en-contact/Organisatie/Gerechtshoven/Gerechtshof-Den-Haag/Nieuws/Paginas/Onrechtmatig-gehandeld-bij-Sri-Lankaanse-adoptiezaak.aspx?fbclid=IwY2xjawNG2spleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFOWGV3aGx5aDlWdEJBa2o1AR4rnM9k0neiL_aIxdLo> accessed 1 December 2025.
[4] Lynelle Long, ‘Intercountry adoptees taking legal action and reclaiming our rights’ (Intercountry Adoptee Voices, 17 October 2025) <https://intercountryadopteevoices.com/2025/10/17/intercountry-adoptees-taking-legal-action-and-reclaiming-our-rights/> accessed 8 November 2025.
[5] ‘Illegaal geadopteerde heeft recht op alle informatie over zijn/haar adoptie’ (Prakken d’Oliveira, 23 November 2018) <https://www.prakkendoliveira.nl/nl/nieuws/2018/illegaal-geadopteerde-heeft-recht-op-alle-informatie-over-zijn-haar-adoptie?> accessed 1 December 2025.
[6] Lynelle Long, ‘Intercountry adoptees taking legal action and reclaiming our rights’ (Intercountry Adoptee Voices, 17 October 2025) <https://intercountryadopteevoices.com/2025/10/17/intercountry-adoptees-taking-legal-action-and-reclaiming-our-rights/> accessed 8 November 2025.
[7] ‘Geen schadevergoeding in adoptizaak van vrouw uit Bangladesh (de Rechtspraak, 12 September 2023) <https://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie-en-contact/Organisatie/Gerechtshoven/Gerechtshof-Den-Haag/Nieuws/Paginas/Geen-schadevergoeding-in-adoptiezaak-van-vrouw-uit-Bangladesh.aspx> accessed 1 December 2025.
[8] ‘Geadopteerden uit Sri Lanka stellen Staat aansprakelijk voor misstanden’ (NOS Nieuws, 25 July 2023) <https://nos.nl/artikel/2484182-geadopteerden-uit-sri-lanka-stellen-staat-aansprakelijk-voor-misstanden> accessed 1 December 2025.
[9] Lynelle Long, ‘Intercountry adoptees taking legal action and reclaiming our rights’ (Intercountry Adoptee Voices, 17 October 2025) <https://intercountryadopteevoices.com/2025/10/17/intercountry-adoptees-taking-legal-action-and-reclaiming-our-rights/> accessed 8 November 2025.
______________
Rapport Commissie Onderzoek Interlandelijke Adoptie (Report Committee on the Investigation of Intercountry Adoption) (2021)
Report: https://open.overheid.nl/documenten/ronl-8cc003fa-eadc-4d7a-8b49-9ea6e661bb94/pdf
Unofficial English Translation: https://www.ft.dk/samling/20201/almdel/sou/spm/679/svar/1795361/2418605.pdf