Dutch earthquake damage agency defends expert independence after reported ruling

The Dutch agency handling damage claims linked to gas extraction in Groningen and Drenthe says it will not change its assessment procedures after a reported court finding that one external expert was not independent. The experts’ advice helps determine whether residents receive compensation. [1] [2]

The Institute for Mining Damage Groningen (IMG) told ANP on 25 September 2026 that it had no reason to doubt the independence of its hired experts and saw no grounds to alter its approach. [1]

Its response followed a report by Follow the Money (FTM) about Rinse Wiersum, a co-owner of D.O.G. Ingenieurs. According to FTM, the Noord-Nederland district court found that Wiersum was not independent in a case concerning damage to Sietze de Jong’s home in Norg. The IMG had rejected De Jong’s application in February 2025 on the basis of Wiersum’s assessment, the outlet reported. [2]

FTM said Wiersum had omitted his role as a director and shareholder of D.O.G. from his disclosure statement. Marion de Jonge, a judge speaking on behalf of the court, told the outlet that the ruling concerned this expert, not the company as a whole. The underlying judgment was not available for independent review for this report. [2]

What safeguards does the IMG cite?

The IMG says external experts complete a questionnaire covering matters including independence and experience before being admitted to its expert register. It also points to disclosure statements as a safeguard. [1] [2]

The agency argues that earlier court decisions, including decisions by the Council of State’s Administrative Jurisdiction Division, support the adequacy of its arrangements. That is the IMG’s stated legal defence; the available material does not establish how those earlier decisions apply to Wiersum’s case or how thoroughly his disclosures were checked. [2]