Skip to content
RutaCuracaoCuraçao immigration guide

Home › Undocumented

Molenplein police station, Willemstad

Photo: Charles Hoffman from New York, United States, CC BY-SA 2.0

Immigration detention in Curaçao: what 15 court rulings say about your rights

· RisksRights

Legal review: pending This page summarises court rulings and has not yet been reviewed by a lawyer. It is not legal advice. What this means

First, the figure that changes the conversation

Of the 172 immigration rulings we analyzed, 15 deal with the detention of foreign nationals (vreemdelingenbewaring). The foreign national won 7 (47%): one of the highest rates (in protection and asylum cases, Art. 3 ECHR, it reaches 59%). Not because judges are lenient, but because the government has very specific obligations before and during a detention, and in almost half the cases it did not meet them. Knowing them is the difference between a detention of days and one of months.

Detention is the last resort, not the first

A Colombian man and a Colombian woman entered legally as tourists, overstayed, and were detained with valid passports and a known temporary address. The court annulled the detention: the Ministry did not explain why a lighter measure, such as a periodic reporting duty, was not enough (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2023:239 and ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2023:240). Two things weighed in their favour: a valid passport and a verifiable address. If you are detained, state and prove both at the first interview.

The checklist the government must follow (a court already required it)

The most complete ruling on the subject (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2023:258) set out these obligations for the Ministry. In that case, what made the detention unlawful from day one was that the order did not explain why a lighter measure was not enough or why there was a real prospect of removal. The other failings count differently: not asking him about his circumstances was a defect, but it did not by itself annul the detention, because there was no sign it would have changed the outcome; and a late re-assessment makes the detention unlawful from that moment, not from the start:

  1. Interview you before detaining you, actively asking about your personal circumstances (family, address, health, documents).
  2. Explain in writing why a lighter measure is not enough and why there is a real prospect of removal.
  3. Re-assess the detention as soon as you request protection, and again every time you challenge its refusal.
  4. Re-assess it mandatorily at 6 months.

The 6-month limit

A Venezuelan intercepted by boat spent 11 months in detention, 9 of them after requesting protection, with no decision on his case. The court said that requesting protection does not by itself make detention unlawful, but that the Ministry must promptly re-assess whether it can remove you within the 6 months, counted from the day you were detained, and then act diligently. Because it did not, the detention was unlawful from the day he requested protection, about 5 weeks after he was detained, not from the sixth month (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2022:1). After 6 months it is presumed that there is no longer a prospect of removal, and only two exceptions allow the detention to continue: the person deliberately frustrating the investigation into their identity, or removal being very likely shortly after the 6 months (in that case, a decision expected almost 2 months later no longer counted as shortly). "Flight risk" or "public order" are not enough: keeping him detained after the sixth month was unlawful; by then he was already free, and the ruling allows him to claim compensation (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2023:256).

In 2025 the court added a nuance: there is no legal basis for detaining automatically just for irregular entry, but the Ministry may detain if it documents a concrete public-order reason (no documents, no registration, no means). It also said that the Ministry must tell you that you can raise your personal circumstances. Failing to do so is a defect, but in that case it did not make the detention unlawful, because there were no circumstances that required a lighter measure. It is up to you to raise them, already at the first interview (health, family, address): if there are any, the Ministry has to weigh them and, if they make detention disproportionate, settle for a lighter measure. And because the Ministry did not diligently decide the objection against the refusal of protection, keeping people detained beyond 6 months was unlawful, and the release order was upheld (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2025:194).

What does not protect you

Compensation: it exists, but through the right court

Claiming money for the detention itself is a matter for the civil judge, not the administrative one (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2022:64 · Aruba). When what is challenged is the unlawful removal order that led to detention, the administrative judge can intervene. In Aruba, under similar law, a Colombian detained for 38 days under an unlawful order received Afl 80 per day (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2023:241); there the "administrative retention" of an asylum seeker was also declared without legal basis (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2022:165). These are Aruba cases: useful as reference, not as an automatic rule for Curaçao.

What the European Court said in 2026

On April 21, 2026 the European Court of Human Rights decided Y.F.C. and Others v. the Netherlands (application no. 21325/19): seven Venezuelans who reached Curaçao by boat on April 11, 2019 and were detained. The Court did not examine whether the detention itself was lawful (that complaint was not admitted because no appeal had been lodged with the Curaçao court), but it found against the Kingdom on two points. First, they spent the first week without access to a lawyer, so they could not ask a judge to review their detention. Second, when they were being transferred to the prison a scuffle broke out and officers used rubber bullets and force without the government showing this was strictly necessary, and without an effective investigation afterwards. It awarded between 1,625 and 5,000 euros per person.

What this means for you: you have the right to speak to a lawyer from the very start of a detention, not days later. Ask for one in writing and note the date and time you asked.

What to do if you (or someone close to you) are detained

  1. Ask in writing for the reasons for the detention and why no lighter measure was applied. Note the date and time.
  2. Give a verifiable address in Curaçao and show your passport, even if expired; if someone can act as guarantor, have them say so in writing and also undertake to ensure your departure if it is ordered in the end.
  3. If you fear returning to your country, request international protection immediately and in writing; it suspends removal while it is decided (see our article on Art. 3 ECHR).
  4. Contact HRDC or a lawyer from the official directory. Appeal deadlines are short and strict.
  5. Count the days from the day of detention: at month 6, with no decision and no removal date, the detention must be reviewed and, under these precedents, end. If you requested protection, the Ministry had to re-assess it straight away, not when that month comes.

Source: the 15 detention (bewaring) rulings among the 172 analyzed, issued by the courts of Curaçao and the Joint Court of Justice; several are from Aruba and are flagged as such. Full list and links in Jurisprudencia (Spanish). Also the European Court of Human Rights judgment Y.F.C. and Others v. the Netherlands (April 21, 2026). Public information, not legal advice: a detention requires a lawyer.

Have questions? Join our official community where we frequently answer questions:

YouTube TikTok Facebook

← See all blog articles

Was this page helpful?