Proper Motivation of Decisions in The Hague
For residents of The Hague, proper motivation of a decision forms a cornerstone of administrative law. Administrative authorities such as The Hague Municipality must clearly explain the reasons for each decision, based on facts, interests, and laws. This promotes transparency, provides certainty, and enables citizens to challenge or contest decisions at the The Hague District Court. Deficient motivation can lead to annulment by the court.
Legal Basis
This obligation is set out in the General Administrative Law Act (Awb), particularly Article 3:46 Awb: "The administrative authority shall motivate its decisions." It aligns with principles such as Article 3:2 Awb (purposes and stakeholders), Article 3:4 Awb (proportionality), and Article 3:12 Awb (due care). The The Hague District Court applies this in local cases, while Council of State case law such as ECLI:NL:RVS:2002:AE6389 (addressing all aspects) and ECLI:NL:RVS:2015:AP9367 (specific and not vague) provides further refinement. More on the duty to motivate.
Requirements for Proper Motivation
Motivation is proper if it is complete, accurate, specific, and timely. Key points:
- Completeness: Include all facts, considerations, and standards; omissions weaken the decision.
- Accuracy: Correct facts and application of law; errors lead to annulment.
- Specificity: Avoid vague phrases like "public interest"; explain why the decision fits here.
- Timeliness: Provided directly with the decision (Article 3:40 Awb).
- Accessibility: Use understandable language, without ambiguities.
Comparison of good and poor:
| Properly motivated | Deficiently motivated |
|---|---|
| "Permit denied: building height of 15 meters disproportionately harms views in the Zeeheldenbuurt, see objections from 20 neighbors and aesthetic advice from The Hague Municipality dated 12-03-2023." | "Refusal for general interest." |
| "Subsidy approved: project meets criteria X/Y, budget €50,000, benefits 500 hours of volunteer work in The Hague neighborhoods." | "No subsidy, does not fit." |
Examples from The Hague Practice
The Hague Municipality refuses an environmental permit for an extension: "Eaves height exceeded by 3 meters (art. 2.12 Bro) disrupts streetscape in Schilderswijk, confirmed by aesthetics report dated 15-05-2023. Applicant's interest does not outweigh locally protected character (policy rule 4.2)." This demonstrates facts, law, and balance.
For water board subsidy: "Rejection of dyke reinforcement: not priority 1 in Implementation Programme 2023-2027, alternative nature-friendly banks saves €200,000 for The Hague coast." Concrete and verifiable.
Poor: Parking fine in central The Hague with only "Violation observed," without time, location, or evidence. This invites successful objection.
Rights and Obligations
Citizen Rights:
- Motivated decision within the deadline (art. 4:13 Awb).
- Objection for deficient motivation (art. 6:3 Awb).
- Judicial review at The Hague District Court (art. 8:12 Awb).
Obligations of Authorities:
- Motivate in objection/appeal proceedings (not internal matters).
- Respond to objections (art. 3:41 Awb).
- Revision with new motivation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What if the motivation is poor?
Object within six weeks (art. 6:7 Awb). The Hague District Court often annuls (approx. 15% in 2022), followed by a new decision. Call Juridisch Loket Den Haag.
Does it need to be extensive?
No, concise but complete. Depending on complexity; simple The Hague parking cases suffice with brief explanation.
Challenge solely on motivation?
Yes, standalone ground (art. 6:4 Awb, c). No substantive error required.
When is it not timely?
If not simultaneous with the decision (art. 3:40 Awb). The Hague District Court considers this a defect.