The Reform of the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure in Comparative Perspective: (81 Nijhoff Law Specials)

During the last decades of the 20th century, a consensus has emerged that the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP), which had entered into force in 1926, had become dysfunctional in connection with both main objectives of criminal procedure. The research project ‘Strafvordering 2001’ aimed at answering the question how a CCP would look which meets contemporary needs and corresponds to state of the art doctrinal views, and is coherent in the sense that it offers a systematic criminal procedure approach. The Dutch government responded to the research findings by means of the introduction of several legislative acts. The contributions in this book discuss the question of whether the legislator has succeeded in improving the law of criminal procedure.

Table of Contents:
Preface; 25 years of criminal procedure in the Netherlands Geert Corstens 1. Introduction 2. Moons Committee and Criminal Procedure (Strafvordering) 2001 3. Consensuality in criminal law 4. Protection of the accused and the victim 5. More powers for the police and Public Prosecution Service 6. Flexible review by the criminal court of breaches of procedural rules 7. Conclusion The Dutch system of legal remedies Jan Watse Fokkens and Nathalie Kirkels-Vrijman 1. Introduction 2. Appeal 3. Appeal in cassation 4. Retrial 5. Conclusion The judge in the pre-trial investigation Stijn Franken 1. The narrow margins of the debate 2. Theory and practice 3. The duties of the examining magistrate 4. Not more, but less and better Some main findings of ‘Strafvordering 2001’ and the subsequent reform of Dutch criminal procedure Marc Groenhuijsen 1. Introduction 2. Main reasons for dysfunctional Code and ad hoc solutions 3. The research project ‘Strafvordering 2001’: scope, method and main findings 4. How did the government respond to these findings? 5. Reflection on general trends 6. Conclusion The extrajudicial disposal of criminal cases Tijs Kooijmans 1. Introduction 2. Historic backgrounds of the punishment order 3. The main aspects of the Public Prosecution Service (Settlement) Act 4. Similarities and differences between Criminal Procedure 2001 and the Public Prosecution Service (Settlement) Act 5. In conclusion Internal access in the preliminary investigation Dirk van der Landen 1. Introduction 2. The statutory rules on internal access to the preliminary investigation 3. Criminal Procedure 2001 (Strafvordering 2001) 4. In conclusion The examination in court according to Criminal Procedure 2001 (Strafvordering 2001), partly as a reflection on trial by jury Theo de Roos 1. Introduction 2. The jury as a mirror 3. Starting points of Criminal Procedure 2001 and the examination in court 4. The public examination in court and the establishment of the truth in an international perspective 5. The meaning of the substantiation of evidence 6. In conclusion The law of evidence and substantiation of evidence Joep Simmelink 1. Introduction 2. The impetus: the sub-report on ‘Evidentiary Law and Substantiation of Evidence’ 3. Legal development after ‘Criminal Procedure 2001’ 4. Reference points for further legal development Reform proposals on Dutch criminal procedure – A German perspective Thomas Weigend 1. Introduction: the pleasures of comparing law 2. Aspects of Strafvordering 2001: general issues 3. Aspects of Strafvordering 2001: specific issues 4. Conclusion A Review of the Criminal Courts of England and Wales by The Right Honourable Lord Justice Auld; Index.

About the Author :
Marc S. Groenhuijsen (1956) is Professor of Criminal Law at Tilburg University. He has published extensively on the law of criminal procedure and supervised the ‘Strafvordering 2001’-research project.

Tijs Kooijmans (1975) is Professor of Criminal Law at Tilburg University. He has published extensively on the law of criminal procedure.