Court rules Solvinity can keep maintaining Dutch digital identity platform

A preliminary relief judge in The Hague dismissed claims by three citizens seeking to prevent the Dutch state from renewing its contract with Solvinity. The judge found that discontinuing Solvinity’s management of the national digital identity system, DigiD, is not feasible without unacceptable risks. DigiD is managed by Solvinity, and concerns arose after Solvinity’s proposed acquisition by the U.S. company Kyndryl. Plaintiffs argued that U.S. laws could allow U.S. authorities to access Dutch citizen data, citing the CLOUD Act, FISA, and Executive Order 12333. The state had already approved contract extension permission at the end of March despite a request from the House of Representatives not to do so.

"A preliminary relief judge in The Hague has dismissed the claims of three citizens who sought to prevent the Dutch state from renewing its contract with Solvinity. The judge ruled that discontinuing the latter's management of the national digital identity system is not feasible without unacceptable risks. The reasoning was published yesterday. The national identity platform, known as DigiD, is managed by Solvinity."

"The plaintiffs fear that Solvinity will soon be acquired by the American company Kyndryl. As a result, the management of the Picard platform-the digital foundation on which the DigiD and MijnOverheid platforms operate-would fall under the scope of U.S. law. The CLOUD Act, FISA, and Executive Order 12333 could, in theory, give U.S. authorities access to data belonging to Dutch citizens. The government itself acknowledged this: there are risks,"

"On May 6, the preliminary relief judge of the District Court of The Hague ruled in preliminary relief proceedings regarding the Solvinity contract. Three citizens demanded that the State not renew the agreement. Incidentally, this does not concern the group of prominent figures who, together with the Privacy First foundation, initiated administrative proceedings against the DigiD takeover. "We do not know exactly who the people behind this preliminary injunction are, nor do we know exactly on what grounds this case is being brought," said Eric Smit, one of the initiators of the proceedings against the takeover, when the preliminary injunction became known."

"That extension had already been approved some time ago. State Secretary Eric van der Burg had granted permission at the end of March, even though the House of Representatives had asked him not to do so. The preliminary injunction was filed on the deadline date."

Read at Techzine Global