A Dutch judge has ruled that De Telegraaf, the Netherlands’ largest newspaper, must add a clarification to a comment piece about Hamas to prevent readers from misinterpreting it.
On February 27, the preliminary relief judge ordered De Telegraaf to publish a notice alongside journalist Nausicaa Marbe’s comment piece published 10 days previously. The controversy centred on a potential misreading of the text rather than an actual accusation of fraternising with the terrorist organisation Hamas.
The Federation of Islamic Organisations (FIO) objected to a specific punctuation mark, arguing it could mislead readers into believing the group was affiliated with Hamas.
In what could have broader implications for press freedom, the judge acknowledged that De Telegraaf‘s literal interpretation of the sentence was correct but ruled there was a real risk of misinterpretation.
The judge argued that the average reader might not immediately distinguish between a comma and a colon, leading to an unintended conclusion.
As a result, De Telegraaf was ordered to clarify that the column did not label FIO as a Hamas-affiliated organisation — despite the fact that it never explicitly made such a claim.
Published under the headline Gaza Agreement Won’t Stop Jew-Hatred, Marbe’s column discussed an upcoming pro-Gaza demonstration in Amsterdam.
She wrote: “On Sunday, there will also be shouting on Dam Square during a ‘solidarity demonstration with Gaza’ organised by Hamas-affiliated organisations, Milli Görus, and the mosque umbrella group FIO. FIO is a Hague-based umbrella organisation, but the city administration probably has no issue with them siding with Hamas.”
At stake is the comma between “organisations” and “Milli Görus”, which the judge argued could be read as a colon, implying that the organisations that came after the comma were Hamas-related.
The subheading of the comment piece was The Desires of Hamas Supporters, something De Telegraaf said was acceptable under editorial freedom.
FIO argued that Marbe’s wording implied the group was directly linked to Hamas. De Telegraaf countered that this interpretation hinged on a single punctuation mark—the difference between a comma and a colon.
Marbe later clarified she did not mean to have suggested FIO conspired with Hamas. Instead, she used the term “meeheulen” (loosely translated as “going along with”) ironically, meaning FIO had participated in protests where Hamas slogans were chanted and symbols were displayed.
The newspaper also stressed that FIO organised demonstrations with the Palestinian Community in the Netherlands (PGNL), an organisation linked to Hamas by Israeli reports and Berlin’s domestic intelligence agency, Verfassungsschutz Berlin.
The judge ruled that the De Telegraaf column was unlawful regarding FIO, justifying restrictions on the paper’s freedom of expression.
Instead of demanding a full retraction, though, the court ordered the it to amend the sentence, describing it as “unfortunately phrased”.
In his verdict, the judge said: “The average reader, when reading the column superficially, will interpret this sentence differently and conclude that FIO is affiliated with Hamas. This implies a serious accusation of involvement in terrorism and antisemitism, something FIO rightfully wants to distance itself from.
“As a discussion partner in the municipality of The Hague, FIO relies on the trust of the partners it engages with. While the decline in this trust due to the perceived link with Hamas — and the increased suspicion toward FIO as a result — cannot be measured concretely, it is plausible, as explained by the FIO chairman during the oral hearing of this summary proceeding,” the judge said.
“A key factor here is that when the search term ‘FIO’ (whether or not combined with other keywords) is entered into an internet search engine, the column appears as a search result. The (risk of) harm that FIO suffers due to a misinterpretation of the contested statement is real, and FIO has an urgent interest in minimising this damage as much as possible.”
Because of this, the judge ruled the newspaper had to add visible text under the comment on the website stating: “With this sentence, which is poorly worded, the impression may arise that FIO (the Federation of Islamic Organisations), an umbrella group of 25 Hague-based mosque organisations, is affiliated with Hamas. This was explicitly not the columnist’s intention.
“We publish this notice by order of the preliminary relief judge of the Amsterdam court. — The Editorial Board.””
Failure to comply would result in a fine of €2,000 per day, up to a maximum of €50,000. The newspaper must also cover FIO’s legal costs, set at €1,940.
Thomas Bruning, secretary of the journalists’ union NVJ, said the ruling went too far and called for an appeal. “You can’t write anything anymore if a judge starts imagining what a reader might see in it that isn’t actually there!” Bruning said on X on March 5.
Critics have argued that the judge assumed an editorial role, prioritising potential perceived reader interpretations over the actual wording.
Islamic media platform Islam Omroep called the ruling “a crushing defeat for the Netherlands’ tabloid newspaper and a victory for justice and fairness”.
At the time of writing, De Telegraaf was still considering an appeal.
