The passage of an amendment with a narrow margin of 72 votes in favor and 69 against was primarily due to the absence of several Members of Parliament, but also involved complications with the established pairing system. The pairing system, which usually ensures votes reflect the true political balance by matching absent members with opposing counterparts, faltered when several absentees could not find suitable pairs. This ultimately led to the amendment’s approval.

The absence of key members, particularly during a significant national commemoration, further exacerbated the issue. Christine Teunissen of the Party for the Animals cited her attendance at the slavery past commemoration in Amsterdam and transportation difficulties as reasons for her absence. She expressed disappointment that the criminalization of illegal stay now had a majority, she believes, it did not rightfully earn, blaming the proponents for not postponing the votes.

Even with Teunissen present, the proposal might still have passed due to other pairing complications. An absent NSC member, due to a family bereavement, was paired with a GroenLinks-PvdA member, but this pairing proved ineffective as both parties opposed the criminalization. This highlights the complexities of the pairing system and how it can sometimes fail to accurately represent the political will.

Another proposal, concerning priority for status holders in social housing, also passed with a similar vote count of 72 to 69. Accusations are being directed towards the left-leaning parties, particularly GroenLinks-PvdA, for having too many members absent due to Ketikoti celebrations, making it impossible to find pairs for all absentees. This situation reveals tensions and disagreements surrounding the management of parliamentary procedures and the prioritization of national events versus legislative duties.