Distribution of internet addresses for threats and sanctions is prohibited.

Spreading someone’s address online to intimidate: This is also known as doxing. A large parliamentary majority will ban the bill today, but parties have many questions about viability, according to a round in NOS.

This afternoon, the cabinet’s bill will be discussed, and indeed all parties think that doxing should be banned. Currently, it is not always possible to take action when the home address of an agent, scientist, journalist, or other person is shared online for intimidation. Because only the dissemination of personal data cannot be punished.

But parties still have many questions about a ban. For example, the CDA is wondering if it can be proven in court that the address was indeed published for intimidation purposes.

D66 also supports the law, but considers it “wipe on tap”. You can find the addresses of many people who own a company through the Chamber of Commerce. We are currently working on doing something about it, but whoever owns a house can be found in the land registry, for example.

D66 MP Joost Sneller wants this data to be protected so that only professionals such as agents can access it. “We need to make it easy for malicious people to obtain the address information of judges, lawyers, journalists and scientists.”

Is the punishment enough?

The VVD wonders if a one-year sentence is enough to act as a deterrent. The SGP also seeks tougher penalties, especially to intimidate authorities. PVV wants those who do the latter not to evade community service.

Some parties state that the police and prosecutors will have additional legislation at their disposal, but will suddenly not have more capacity to investigate these cases. Finding out who is posting addresses anonymously on the Internet can be difficult. This requires capacities that are not always available.

Anna Berlee, professor of data protection and privacy law at Open University, thinks criminalizing is a good idea. But they have the same questions as politicians. “Practice will have to show how this can be implemented and enforced by the police and the judiciary.”

Like D66, he thinks that public registers, such as the land registry, should be reconsidered as they are now. Now he sees a problem with this: “Even if you pay close attention to your information on the Internet, for example, a home address can be read relatively easily.” The cabinet recently said it wants to work to protect the data of others. Chamber of Commerce, but having a clear land registry is necessary for the smooth functioning of the housing market.

Source: NOS

follow:
\