More than half of young Dutch men with Moroccan backgrounds in Rotterdam have had problems with the police. Their Antillean, Surinamese and Turkish counterparts also figure highly in the latest report on crime in the city. Criminology professor Frank Bovenkerk calls his findings alarming, but in his farewell speech at Utrecht University said, “It’s not due to ethnic backgrounds”. 

New crime statistics show an alarming overrepresentation of ethnic groups. So why is this happening?

In his farewell speech, criminology professor Frank Bovenkerk offered another way of looking at youth delinquency figures.

Crime figures are normally compiled on a yearly basis. However, Professor Bovenkerk has looked at criminal behaviour spanning a number of years, between the ages of 18 and 24. His approach has resulted in an entirely different outcome. The professor linked information based on ethnicity to crime figures.

This is not permitted in the Netherlands, but the police department, youth care organisations and advisory groups in Rotterdam have been allowed to make the link, thanks to a special legal construction introduced in 2002.

Shock
Despite the multicultural projects, and the efforts of community leaders and youth services to promote integration, 55 percent of Moroccan youth between the ages of 18 and 24 are picked up by police as crime suspects.

The same goes for 40 percent of Antillean and Surinamese youth and 36 percent of Turkish youth. These statistics are based on the city of Rotterdam, but Professor Bovenkerk does not see any reason why the statistics would be differ for any other major Dutch city.

There is resistance to Rotterdam’s policy of registering the ethnic background of ‘high-risk’ youth. The Aruban - Antillean organisation MAAPP, for example, criticises the practice. Chairman Raymond Labad says, “Ethnic registration has been banned since World War II.” His reference may be a bit charged, but his fear of discrimination and stigmatisation is clear.

In local Rotterdam as well as in national politics, ethnic registration is highly disputed. The minister responsible for integration, Eberhard van der Laan, feels “a principle discussion must take place based on constitutional and international agreements”. A national privacy ‘watchdog’ is looking at whether Rotterdam has actually broken the law.

Appreciation
There are, however, colleagues of Professor Bovenkerk who can appreciate what he is doing. Professor at VU University Henk Effers thinks it is useful to know exactly ‘where it hurts’. He reckons that an effective policy can only be created if it is based on actual fact.

Above all, he thinks it important that Professor Bovenkerk clearly points out the ‘ethnic explanation’. Saying that they are criminal because they’ve been brought up that way doesn’t make sense:

“On the one hand, there is the socio-economic question. Many Moroccans, but also other ethnic groups, are deprived socio-economically speaking. On the other hand, the social control within these groups is much lower than within the broader Dutch population.”

These two things are not unrelated, Professor Effers explains. When children are sent outside to play because there is not enough room inside, there is little social control on the street. The professor also remarks that his colleague’s report has brought to light the fact that almost 20 percent of native Dutch youth have had a brush with the law.

Scoring
Professor Bovenkerk’s report touches on a delicate subject within political circles. Politicians like anti-immigration proponent Geert Wilders could use these figures to score political points. Mr Bovenkerk would be greatly disappointed if his report were indeed to be used in this way. He has clear ideas on what a good method of tackling the problem would be:

“In any case, I think the job market plays an important role. There’s a lot possible but the youth need to be brought in. And then it’s really a question of stimulating more social control. Within the ethnic groups but also within the families.”