The Dutch government sent a bill to the House of Representatives on Friday, 9 October, to give authorities more room to stop, inspect and detain ships that sail without a valid nationality or under a false flag. The working primary is the Rijksoverheid notice timed 15:45 that day. The dossier number on the parliamentary record is 37038. World Ports and Port News carried the English read on Monday, 12 October. The bill would amend the Foreign Ships Act — Wet buitenlandse schepen — and other legislation. It is aimed at what The Hague calls the Russian shadow fleet: older tankers used to move oil around sanctions, often with no flag or a false flag. It is not in force. Parliament has not voted. Entry into force would be set later by royal decree. It is not a North Sea boarding that has already happened, not an OFAC listing, and not a Hormuz kinetic file.
The ministers named on the notice are Vincent Karremans, Infrastructure and Water Management; Dilan Yeşilgöz-Zegerius, Defence; and David van Weel, Justice and Security. If the bill is adopted, shadow-fleet ships sailing under a false flag in the Dutch exclusive economic zone could be stopped and required to divert to an anchorage or port for further inspection. A ship could then be detained, and the master could be arrested. The maximum prison term for sailing under a false flag of the Kingdom of the Netherlands would rise to four years. Captains sailing vessels without nationality could face up to four years in prison or a fifth-category fine. Since 1 January 2026 that category’s statutory maximum is €110,000. The bill does not itself reprint the euro figure; the category is the Criminal Code line.
What Friday’s text actually puts on the table
The Hague’s own summary is operational, not rhetorical. Amending the Foreign Ships Act is meant to create more possibilities to deal at sea with ships that have no flag or a false flag. In the EEZ, a false-flag shadow-fleet ship could be detained and ordered into an anchorage or harbour. Inspection, detention and an arrest of the master sit after that diversion, not as a free-standing high-seas seizure. World Ports’ Monday read adds the enforcement map: the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate would oversee the work, with the Coast Guard, police and, where necessary, the armed forces. Operators would in principle bear the costs of enforcement and of a ship’s stay in port. A vessel detained as stateless could remain held until nationality and the right to fly a flag had been established, relevant deficiencies were corrected, and applicable costs were settled.
The infrastructure minister would also gain powers, in exceptional circumstances involving shipping interests or national security, to deny foreign or stateless vessels access to Dutch ports or to close part of the territorial sea. That is a port-entry and territorial-sea tool, not an EEZ transit ban. Do not brief Friday as a closed North Sea or a completed denial list.
The notice is explicit about why The Hague wants the powers. Shadow-fleet ships are described as old and often uninsured, a safety and environmental risk on the North Sea. An accident, the government says, could have large environmental consequences, and without valid insurance it would be hard to recover the costs. The same ships, it says, can also be used for espionage or sabotage. The North Sea holds wind farms, drilling platforms, and data and electricity cables that can be mapped and disrupted. Those are the government’s stated reasons. They are not a published finding against a named hull on 9 October.
The Council of State issued an urgent advisory in the summer. After that advice, the government says it explained further how the proposal sits with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and how it would lead to a more effective approach to the shadow fleet. World Ports’ Monday read is plainer on the legal constraint: the Council of State had raised concerns in August over whether proposed detention powers in the Dutch EEZ complied with UNCLOS. The final wording limits such action to powers permitted under the convention. The bill was revised. It was not withdrawn. Dossier 37038 had reached “submitted” on 9 October. Written round, plenary debate, vote, Senate and official gazette had not.
World Ports also records that the Russian Embassy in the Netherlands has warned Moscow could take reciprocal action against measures it considers hostile to Russian vessels. That is a diplomatic colour line, not a published counter-measure and not a reason to treat the bill as already in force.
Operational implications
For a DPA, a North Sea tanker operator, or a manager with ships transiting the Dutch EEZ toward Rotterdam, Amsterdam, the Scheldt or German and Danish North Sea ports, Friday is a legislative file, not a new boarding circular. Until royal decree commencement, today’s Foreign Ships Act, port-state control, and existing sanctions and insurance screens still govern. What the bill would change, if adopted, is the toolkit against statelessness and false flags inside the geography UNCLOS allows: investigation of nationality, specified boarding and detention of stateless ships, EEZ diversion of false-flag ships to an anchorage or port, detention until flag and deficiencies are sorted, cost recovery on the operator, and, in exceptional cases, port denial or a partial territorial-sea closure.
The false-flag prison term is the line that will show up in a master’s briefing note. Sailing under a false Kingdom flag would move from a one-year maximum to four years. Sailing without nationality would sit at up to four years or a fifth-category fine, €110,000 at the 2026 Criminal Code maximum. That is a master-level exposure, not only a company fine. It is still a proposed exposure.
Do not read the bill as a worldwide port ban on Russian-linked tankers, as a substitute for OFAC, EU or UK listings, or as cover for a boarding in another coastal state’s EEZ. The geography is Dutch: EEZ diversion and inspection, Dutch ports, Dutch territorial sea. A ship on a North Sea passage that is not calling the Netherlands still has to know whether it is in the Dutch EEZ. AIS identity, flag documents, and the right to fly the flag on the transponder are the papers the Inspectorate would be able to test more directly. A hull already on a sanctions list is not, on Friday’s notice, automatically detainable. The triggers described are no nationality and false flag, inside UNCLOS limits, plus the exceptional port-denial power.
Do not recast Friday as an in-force detention regime, a completed UNCLOS finding against a named fleet, a North Sea mine or sabotage circular, a rewrite of the 8 October US 22-tanker package, or a Hormuz file. The confirmed facts are a 9 October submission to the Tweede Kamer, dossier 37038, a Foreign Ships Act amendment aimed at stateless and false-flag shadow-fleet ships, Council of State UNCLOS tightening, and commencement only after a vote and a royal decree.
What Operators Should Note
- Treat Bill 37038 as a submitted text, not a live boarding power. Rijksoverheid notice 9 October, 15:45. Tweede Kamer dossier 37038. Ministers Karremans, Yeşilgöz-Zegerius and van Weel. Written round, debate, vote and royal-decree commencement have not happened. Keep today’s Foreign Ships Act, PSC and sanctions screens until then. Do not rewrite an SMS North Sea annex on the strength of a submission.
- Map EEZ diversion separately from port denial. If adopted, false-flag shadow-fleet ships in the Dutch EEZ could be stopped and ordered to an anchorage or port for inspection, then detained, with the master liable to arrest. Exceptional ministerial powers would cover denying foreign or stateless ships access to Dutch ports, or closing part of the territorial sea, for shipping interests or national security. That is not an EEZ-wide transit ban and not a high-seas right. The Council of State forced the EEZ wording back onto UNCLOS-permitted powers.
- Put identity documents on the same sheet as sanctions lists. The bill’s described triggers are no nationality and false flag, not a named OFAC or EU hull list. Ports, underwriters and charterers already key on MMSI, call sign and flag. A transponder that does not match the papers the master can produce is the risk the Inspectorate, Coast Guard and, where needed, the armed forces would be equipped to test. Operator cost recovery and a stay in port until flag, deficiencies and costs are settled sit after detention.
- Brief the master on the proposed penalty band. Knowingly using a Kingdom of the Netherlands flag without authorisation: maximum prison term up from one year to four. Sailing without nationality: up to four years or a fifth-category fine. The 2026 Criminal Code maximum for that category is €110,000. That figure is the statutory ceiling, not a published tariff in the bill. It is still proposed.
- Keep the North Sea infrastructure line as government rationale, not a named-hull finding. The Hague cites old, often uninsured tankers, pollution-cost recovery, and the risk that such ships can map or disrupt wind farms, platforms, and data and power cables. No 9 October casualty, wreck or cable cut is attached. Do not invent one. Do not merge this file with Black Sea drone casualties or with Hormuz projectile warnings.
- Do not treat embassy colour as a counter-measure already in force. World Ports records a Russian Embassy warning of possible reciprocal action. That is diplomacy. It is not a published Russian instrument, not a reason to reroute a lawful North Sea call, and not a reason to assume the Dutch bill has commenced. Watch the written round and the decree date.
Regulas Shipping will keep lining Bill 37038’s EEZ diversion and false-flag detention powers against UNCLOS and the royal-decree commencement clock so operators can treat The Hague’s shadow-fleet file as a live legislative text, not as an already-in-force North Sea boarding regime.
