UWV chief apologises after discrimination concerns
Abdeluheb Choho calls possible unequal treatment unacceptable, while a wider investigation must still establish what exactly happened.
Follow-up to: UWV under fire over possible discrimination in enforcement Monday, 5 October 2026, 10:15
UWV board chair Abdeluheb Choho has apologised to people who have experienced discrimination within or outside the benefits agency. The trigger was internal research data and an old work instruction that listed ‘country of origin’ as a possible fraud risk.
The apology is a fresh response to reports about the UWV’s enforcement department. Choho says he considers the situation unacceptable, but also stresses that it has not yet been established how extensive the problem is or to what extent origin actually played a role in checks or fines.
An internal investigation last December reportedly found notable differences, according to EenVandaag. People with a non-Dutch surname were said to have been fined relatively more often and, on average, more heavily. It is not known exactly which cases were compared or how the groups were composed. The researchers therefore recommended further investigation.
The UWV says that no firm conclusions can be drawn from the analysis because the method was not sufficiently scientific. The organisation is nevertheless conducting a wider external investigation into possible unjustified discrimination. Its findings are expected later this year, according to reports.
A 2015 work instruction for detecting sham arrangements also came to light. It listed ‘applicant’s country of origin’ among other characteristics that could be used to select a case. The UWV says this criterion was never used and was officially removed in 2020. In a version that was still circulating, the text had only been crossed out, according to the organisation; the UWV now says it will remove the passage entirely.
The issue touches on how public-service agencies combat fraud. Selection based on origin is prohibited, but an organisation may prioritise cases using verifiable indicators. The investigations to come must establish whether this involved an administrative error, individual violations or a broader pattern. Until then, the differences in fines are a serious signal, but not definitive proof of ethnic profiling.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- An internal UWV investigation reported differences in the frequency and size of fines by surname.
- The cases and method used have not been fully disclosed, and the UWV says no firm conclusions can be drawn.
- An old work instruction contained ‘applicant’s country of origin’ as a visible but crossed-out criterion.
- The UWV is conducting a wider external investigation, and the board chair has apologised to people who have experienced discrimination.
Left
Arguments The reports fit the risk that public-service agencies may systematically select people based on origin. The UWV should temporarily suspend checks based on risk profiles, have the cases independently investigated and actively provide redress to those affected.
Values Equal treatment, legal protection and institutional responsibility.
Consequences This could temporarily slow the fight against fraud, but from this perspective it would prevent citizens from being approached on the basis of their origin and increase trust in government.
Centre
Arguments There are serious reports, but policy should be based on verifiable evidence. An independent investigation should reconstruct the method, the cases and the decisions, after which targeted measures can follow.
Values Carefulness, practicability and equal treatment under the rule of law.
Consequences The approach may take time, but it would provide a defensible basis for redress, revised instructions and better checks.
Right
Arguments Fraud checks remain necessary, and differences in outcomes do not in themselves prove discrimination. The UWV must exclude origin as a criterion, but should still be able to select cases effectively using demonstrable fraud indicators and hold individual employees who break the rules to account.
Values Enforcement, efficiency and citizens’ responsibility towards the social security system.
Consequences A blanket halt to risk-based monitoring could make fraud harder to detect; unlawful selection should, from this perspective, be tackled firmly and specifically.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The factual core is based on reporting by EenVandaag and an ANP report. Uncertainties about the internal figures are explicitly presented as uncertain.
- confirmed Abdeluheb Choho apologised for experienced discrimination within and around the UWV. — This is stated in Choho’s statement to EenVandaag. source
- confirmed An internal investigation reported differences in fines by surname. — EenVandaag describes the findings, but also notes that the cases and method are not fully known. source
- confirmed The UWV says the analysis does not allow firm conclusions to be drawn. — The UWV’s position is presented in the article. source
- confirmed An old work instruction listed ‘applicant’s country of origin’ as a possible risk characteristic. — This is described by EenVandaag; the UWV says the criterion was not used and was later removed. source
Editor's note
Choho’s apology, the mention of the criterion in the work instruction and the ongoing investigation are certain. The quality of the internal analysis and whether the criterion was used in practice remain uncertain.Sources
The story so far
- Monday, 5 October 2026, 10:15 UWV under fire over possible discrimination in enforcement
- Monday, 5 October 2026, 13:16 UWV chief apologises after discrimination concerns (this article)
More on this in Dutch media
- RTL Nieuws — „uwv discriminatie”
- NOS — „uwv discriminatie”
- Het Parool — „uwv discriminatie”