Belediging in the Netherlands: Artikel 266 Sr Explained

Belediging is the Dutch criminal offence of insult, and artikel 266 Sr is the residual article of the code's defamation titel. It catches the intentional insult that does not carry the character of smaad or smaadschrift.

The line between the two is not how rude the words were. It is whether the speaker imputed a specific, definite fact (een bepaald feit) about the person, which is what smaad requires and what eenvoudige belediging by definition lacks.

Two features of the article surprise readers arriving from English-language sources. The first is that a plain insult carries a genuine criminal maximum of three months of imprisonment (gevangenisstraf) or a fine (geldboete) of the second category. The second is that the article is far less self-executing than that maximum suggests: it is a klachtdelict, so as a rule no prosecution follows unless the person insulted files a klacht, and even then the decision to prosecute is not theirs.

Information last verified on 21 July 2026. This page provides general legal information about Netherlands law and does not constitute legal advice in an individual case.

What artikel 266 Sr actually says

Artikel 266 lid 1 Sr reads:

Elke opzettelijke belediging die niet het karakter van smaad of smaadschrift draagt, hetzij in het openbaar mondeling of bij geschrift of afbeelding, hetzij iemand, in zijn tegenwoordigheid mondeling of door feitelijkheden, hetzij door een toegezonden of aangeboden geschrift of afbeelding, aangedaan, wordt, als eenvoudige belediging, gestraft met gevangenisstraf van ten hoogste drie maanden of geldboete van de tweede categorie.

Three elements have to be made out separately. The insult must be opzettelijk (intentional); it must not carry the character of smaad or smaadschrift, which is a negative element rather than a defence; and it must take one of three listed forms.

The custodial maximum is a gevangenisstraf, because every offence in this titel is a misdrijf rather than an overtreding. The fine is a geldboete van de tweede categorie, dealt with in the table further down.

The modality is an element, not a description

The three forms in lid 1 are alternatives, joined in the text by hetzij, so one of them suffices, and each is doing real work:

• in het openbaar, spoken, in writing or by image (bij geschrift of afbeelding);
• to the person in their presence (in zijn tegenwoordigheid), spoken or door feitelijkheden, which reaches conduct such as a gesture or spitting and not only words;
• by a writing or image sent or offered to them (een toegezonden of aangeboden geschrift of afbeelding), the limb that catches a letter, an email or a direct message.

An insult that is none of these three does not meet lid 1 on its own terms. A remark made about someone to a third party in private, not publicly, not in the person's presence and never sent to them, falls outside the wording of the article, whatever else might be said about it.

Lid 2: the exception is about public affairs

The second lid carves a class of conduct out of the offence altogether. It reads:

Niet als eenvoudige belediging strafbaar zijn gedragingen die ertoe strekken een oordeel te geven over de behartiging van openbare belangen, en die er niet op zijn gericht ook in ander opzicht of zwaarder te grieven dan uit die strekking voortvloeit.

The exception covers conduct whose purpose is to give a judgement on the handling of public affairs (de behartiging van openbare belangen), and which is not aimed at wounding in some other respect, or more heavily, than that purpose entails. Both halves are required, so criticism of how a public matter is being handled loses the exception once it turns into a personal attack that goes beyond the criticism.

Lid 2 is worded around de behartiging van openbare belangen and contains no scientific or artistic exception. The exception is defined by the purpose of judging how a public matter is being handled, and by the limit that the conduct must not be aimed at wounding beyond what that purpose entails. Those two halves are the whole of it.

Where belediging ends and smaad begins

Where the statement imputes a specific, definite fact with the manifest purpose of giving it publicity, the offence is smaad or smaadschrift under artikel 261 Sr, which carries a higher custodial maximum and a category 3 fine, and where the maker knew the imputation was false it is laster under artikel 262 Sr. That boundary, the exceptie in artikel 261 lid 3 Sr and the civil route are covered on the page on smaad en laster.

Artikel 267 Sr: the uplift for insults aimed at public authority

Artikel 267 Sr creates no offence of its own. It provides that the gevangenisstraffen laid down in the preceding articles of the titel kunnen met een derde worden verhoogd, may be increased by one third, where the insult is directed at one of three targets:

1. the King, the King's spouse, the presumptive successor to the throne, that successor's spouse, or the Regent;
2. an ambtenaar during or in respect of the lawful exercise of his office, expressly excluding leden van algemeen vertegenwoordigende lichamen, so an insult aimed at a member of the Tweede Kamer, the Provinciale Staten or a gemeenteraad is not uplifted;
3. een openbaar lichaam of een openbare instelling, a public body or public institution rather than only a natural person.

Lid 2 puts a person in the public service of a foreign state, lawfully exercising office in the Netherlands, on the same footing as an ambtenaar.

Two limits sit on the face of the text. The increase is discretionary, because the statute says kunnen, and it reaches only the gevangenisstraf. The geldboetecategorie is not raised at all, so eenvoudige belediging aimed at an ambtenaar on duty still has a category 2 fine ceiling while its three-month custodial maximum can become four months. On the same arithmetic, smaadschrift's one year becomes sixteen months and laster's two years becomes two years and eight months.

The uplift also changes the procedure. Artikel 269 lid 2 Sr disapplies the klacht requirement to the artikel 267 cases, and lid 3 disapplies it to belediging of leden van algemeen vertegenwoordigende lichamen, who are therefore outside the uplift and outside the klacht requirement alike; both carve-outs are set out on the page on filing a defamation complaint.

There is no separate offence of insulting the King any more

Artikel 111, artikel 112 and artikel 113 Sr, the majesteitsschennis provisions, and artikel 118 and artikel 119 Sr, which covered insulting a friendly head of state or a foreign representative, all read [Vervallen per 01-01-2020] in the consolidated text of the code.

Insults aimed at the King are now prosecuted under the ordinary belediging articles of Titel XVI, with the artikel 267 Sr uplift available. The repeal took effect on 1 January 2020, and there has been no separate lese-majeste offence in Dutch law since.

Group insult is a different offence in a different titel

Artikel 266 Sr protects an individual. Insulting a group is dealt with separately:

• Artikel 137c Sr: publicly and intentionally expressing oneself in an insulting way about a group of people on grounds of ras, godsdienst of levensovertuiging, seksuele gerichtheid of handicap. Maximum one year gevangenisstraf or a category 3 fine, rising to two years or a category 4 fine under lid 3 where the person makes a beroep or gewoonte of it or acts with two or more others.
• Artikel 137d Sr: publicly inciting hatred, discrimination or violence against people on those grounds, and on grounds of geslacht as well. Maximum two years or a category 4 fine, rising to four years under lid 2.
• Artikel 137e Sr: publishing such an expression, or sending an object containing one to someone other than at their request, distributing it, or holding it in stock (in voorraad heeft) for publication or distribution, in each case anders dan ten behoeve van zakelijke berichtgeving, a business-reporting carve-out written into the opening words. The article carries a fault element on the face of it: the person must know, or reasonably have to suspect, that the expression is of that nature (naar hij weet of redelijkerwijs moet vermoeden), which is what keeps an unwitting republisher outside the offence. Maximum six months or a category 3 fine, rising to one year or a category 4 fine under lid 2.

These articles sit in a different titel of the code, and the klacht requirement in artikel 269 lid 1 Sr is written for belediging strafbaar krachtens deze titel, that is, punishable under Titel XVI. On the face of that wording it does not reach artikel 137c tot en met 137e.

Artikel 270 Sr: defaming a person who has died

Artikel 270 lid 1 Sr punishes conduct in respect of a deceased person that would have been characterised as smaadschrift or smaad had that person still been alive. Every element of artikel 261 Sr is imported hypothetically; laster is not mentioned in the article at all.

The maximum is three months gevangenisstraf or a geldboete van de tweede categorie, the eenvoudige-belediging level, well below what the same conduct against a living person would carry.

Lid 2 sets a closed list of those who may file the klacht: a blood relative or relative by marriage (bloedverwant of aangehuwde) of the deceased in the direct line (in de rechte linie), one in the collateral line to the second degree (in de zijlinie tot de tweede graad), so a brother or sister, or the deceased's spouse (echtgenoot). It is not open to the family at large or to the estate, and the civil position of surviving relatives is a separate question dealt with in Boek 6 BW and covered on the page on smaad en laster.

Artikel 271 Sr: distributing or stocking insulting material

Artikel 271 lid 1 Sr reaches a geschrift of afbeelding whose content is insulting, or smadelijk for a deceased person, where the person verspreidt, openlijk tentoonstelt of aanslaat it, or holds it in stock (in voorraad heeft) in order for that to happen. Stocking with that purpose is enough; actual distribution is not required.

The mental element is deliberately lower than in laster: it is satisfied where the person weet of ernstige reden heeft om te vermoeden that the content is of that nature, so serious reason to suspect will do. Lid 2 applies the same maximum to reading such a writing's content out publicly. Both carry three months gevangenisstraf or a category 2 fine.

Lid 3 is the sanction that has no parallel elsewhere in the titel. Where the person commits one of these offences in zijn beroep, and fewer than two years have passed since an earlier conviction for one of them became irrevocable, the court may bar that person from practising the profession. Lid 4 makes the offences klachtdelicten as well, on the klacht of the persons designated in artikel 269 Sr and in artikel 270 lid 2 Sr, except in the artikel 267 cases.

What a geldboetecategorie is worth in euro

Every fine in this titel is expressed as a category, and the categories are set in artikel 23 lid 4 Sr. The consolidated text prints the older base amounts, and the amounts actually applicable from 1 January 2026 appear only in a bracketed editorial note reading Red: Per 1 januari 2026. The right-hand column below reproduces those notes; the numbered text of artikel 23 lid 4 Sr itself still shows the base column. The applicable amount is the one that governs, and it runs roughly 40 percent above the base figure printed in the article.

Artikel 23 lid 9 Sr provides that these amounts are adjusted elke twee jaar, every two years, with effect from 1 January, by algemene maatregel van bestuur, tracking the consumentenprijsindex since the previous adjustment. The current step is 1 January 2026, so the next falls due on 1 January 2028. This is not an annually indexed figure.

Two further points keep the table honest. The category is a maximum, and artikel 24 Sr requires the court to take the defendant's draagkracht into account so that the fine does not hit their income and assets disproportionately. And artikel 267 Sr, which is the only uplift in the titel, leaves this table untouched.

What the person insulted can do

Smaad, laster and eenvoudige belediging are klachtdelicten: under artikel 269 Sr they are prosecuted only on the klacht of the person against whom the offence was committed.

The klacht period is three months, and under artikel 66 Sr it runs from the day the person entitled to file learned of the act, not from the date of publication.

Artikel 164 Sv provides that a klacht consists of an aangifte together with a request to prosecute, so a report filed without that request may not meet the klacht requirement. How the klacht is filed, who may file it and what happens when the Openbaar Ministerie decides not to prosecute are set out on the page on filing a defamation complaint.

A civil claim under artikel 6:162 BW runs independently of the criminal route: it needs no klacht and is not bound by the three-month klachttermijn. The civil route, including rectificatie and schadevergoeding, is covered on the page on smaad en laster.