A country in which a criminal is protected by privacy laws is sick. In some countries, the photos and names of criminals are published in local newspapers. Shame is a very powerful deterrent.

First the insurance companies should be able to recoup expenses through the liability insurance of the families of the offending young people. Most dutch carry liability insurance and that should pay for damages caused by their family members. In America if you have too many insurance claims against you your premiums go up. If this is true in the Netherlands then parents must explain to their young people the consequences of increased premiums if they vandalize trains, shops, cars, etc. If the parents or kids are not covered by liability insurance than the insurance companies should be allowed to recoup the money directly from either the offending young person or the parents of those young people.

I agree 100% that those convictede pof criminal damage should pay their share of the clean up. The alternative (as always) is raising the premiums,ie the victims pay for the damage.
As for any privacy issues that's for the government to deal with.

If and when they are found guilty and sentenced by the courts, their names will be published and the Insurance companies can do what they want. Until then, they are innocent until proven guilty, and their names should not be published. It could destroy a kids life if his name is published when he is arrested, only later to be cleared on a case of mistaken identity.

I don't understand why such known gathering places are not declared to be alcohol free zones. The police should confiscate any strong drink found.

My grandson was rightly fined €70 for drinking a can of beer in an Eindhoven street a year ago. So why were the Dutch Yobs, not treated in the same way, before the riot started?

@Joos: that sometimes happens here too. Even with a similar case a few months ago: some "fans" of football vandalised things, and those who refused to turn themselves in got their picture published.

So, why now privacy is suddenly such a roadblock, beats me... Hopefully this gets sorted out, as they of course must pay up for what they did.

In the worst case, can't the government get the police to fine them, then send payments from these fines to the insurance companies? In other words: a middleman that isn't blocked by this privacy problem.

Pardon me? What are the insurers for? I didn't know they were supposed to be police investigators

The personal liability insurance does not cover for illegal acts, so no the people involved do not have cover. Naming and shaming in the public is something for the Sun/Daily Mail reader. These people should pay up, but public naming is not helping anyone.

@Roland: The WA (liability) insurance specifically does not cover damage caused by intent. Only sensible really.

Insurers cover accidents and natural diasters; no insurer will pay for this kind of deliberate carnage. Judiciary must make the vandals pay, or force them to work for paying it off.

I don't want to defend those who went to Haren and vandalise it. But this was a mess with capital M, with many people to blame. First, the whole thing would not have gone viral if gemeente Haren would not have put out press release after press release cautioning about the party. Second, why nobody is talking about 3FM's involvement in all this? They heavily publicised this whole thing and to my knowledge, the only thing they have done afterwards is apologise.

As for: Junior justice minister Fred Teeven confirmed the meeting to reporters on Friday, saying he would like to help the insurance companies but there are 'privacy problems'.

I think the above, is a load of rubbish. A person who breaks laws of common decency, must surely lose his rights to privacy.

I am not suitable to be one of the guys, carrying a shield and whacking stick. I would enjoy breaking a few yobbish heads too much! (insert naughty word here)