Transcript of this Dutch broadcasting by Cora Westerink

Every year, thousands of court cases are postponed. A new form of justice must be the start of a solution, in The Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: REPORT:

Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer: “Just imagine, there were 30 such binders. The investigation leader had already died, another had retired, one had been ill for years, the prosecutor, that was the fourth in a row.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “This Limburg case about a series of car thefts had been dragging on for years and the end was not yet in sight. That’s why Gitte Stevens mailed the Public Prosecution Service.” 

Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer reads excerpts from her email to the public prosecutor: “What should we do with this dossier? I hope that you, as the prosecutor of this case, will also acknowledge this and seriously consider a proposal.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “Criminal lawyer Stevens and the public prosecutor involved were going to do something that had never been done in the Netherlands in a case where a prison sentence was at stake. […] Instead of continuing the trial in court, they agreed among themselves on what was sufficiently proven and the sentence. They then presented these procedural agreements to the judge. He agreed with them last December.”

Voice-over Newshour reporter to Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer and public prosecutor Dävid van Kuppeveld: “What came out of it?”

Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer: “24 months’ imprisonment, of which 19 were suspended. My client had already spent 5 months in pre-trial detention, so in the end he did not have to go back to prison.”

Voice-over Newshour reporter to Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer and public prosecutor Dävid van Kuppeveld: “Was he satisfied with that?”

Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer: “Yes, he was happy with it.”

Voice-over Newshour reporter to Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer and public prosecutor, Dävid van Kuppeveld: “Suppose this case had gone to court and been dealt with there, how would it have differed from the situation now?”

Dävid van Kuppeveld, public prosecutor: “Then the examining magistrate would have had a lot of work, the police would have had a lot of work and we would have had to go to court with this case in the end. It has to be prepared in full. That would have cost 5 to 6 days in court, probably. That is all time saved now. Because now we were done in 20 minutes. The case was scheduled for 30 minutes, I think.”

. 

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “This time-saving is worth its weight in gold, as the criminal justice system has become severely congested in recent years. A shortage of officers and judges on the one hand, and increasingly complex cases on the other. And then there is corona. So there is a need to reach a verdict more quickly, even in cases that are too difficult to solve with a settlement. This is possible with process agreements.”

Laura Peters, Criminal law researcher, University of Groningen: “We see different variants of process agreements in Europe. Very often you see that it is confession versus mitigation of punishment that is central. But it does not always have to be that way. I have also seen examples of an agreement where you say: “Well, I’m not submitting any requests for investigation. I’m not going to let a witness from this or that country come over and testify here.” In exchange, the sentence is reduced. The distinctive feature of procedural agreements is that they are all about a quid pro quo.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “This is what Laura Peters, who has been researching this topic for years, says. For suspects it is worthwhile to cooperate in such agreements, because it often results in a reduced sentence and avoids uncertainty.”

Laura Peters, Criminal law researcher, University of Groningen: “Those people want clarity. “When will I get out of this? When will my case be judged? What is that outcome going to be?”

********back to criminal lawyer and public prosecutor Dävid van Kuppeveld: 

Voice-over Newshour reporter to Gitte Stevens, back to criminal lawyer and public prosecutor Dävid van Kuppeveld: “Now critics are saying, “This is backroom horse-trading. This is not the way it should be.”

Dävid van Kuppeveld, public prosecutor: “It is not. The consultation between us is like a public hearing with a settlement proposal that contains everything. It is submitted to a court that knows the file and judges on it. As far as I am concerned, it is actually a new form of justice that is very efficient.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “But still, it is no small thing for a suspect to have to give up his advocacy and therefore his hope of being acquitted. Like in this case:”

FRAGMENT DUTCH NOS NEWS BROADCASTING, JULY 2020:

Anchorwoman Annechien Steenhuizen: “An earthquake for the organised crime. That is what the police call it. For weeks they watched live chat conversations of thousands of criminals.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “The cracking of encrypted phones provides a mountain of new business. One of these was a case against a cocaine smuggler from the port of Rotterdam. That case, too, was settled by process agreements. The cracking of encrypted phones provides a mountain of new business. One of these was a case against a cocaine smuggler from the port of Rotterdam. That case, too, was settled by trial. […] We asked Frank Wieland, the judge who sentenced Willem Holleeder, to look at the verdict.” 

IN THE OFFICE OF JUDGE FRANK WIELAND

.  

Former criminal judge Frank Wieland: “It is in itself a clear case and you can see from the verdict that the evidence was not difficult either.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to former criminal judge Frank Wieland: “He is almost reporting live on his criminal deeds.”

Former criminal judge Frank Wieland: “Yes, indeed! For example in this transcript of encrypted phones, I Quote: ‘We arrive now with this truck, in which I am arleady sitting, another truck will go inside to pick up the stuff.’ […] end quoting encrypted phone-message. A while later we read in the encrypted phones: ‘I will have to collect a machine gun, tomorrow.’ ” end quote encripted message and comment Frank Wieland. 

Former criminal judge Frank Wieland: “In the text and in pictures that have been taken, it becomes a case where you can say that the outcome is already almost certain.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “But if this process had been traditional, the prosecution could have called many witnesses and experts and it could have taken years.”

Former criminal judge Frank Wieland: “What struck me was that after the proposal, 14 days later, these agreements had already been finalised. That makes this case a model for what happened here, for this form of settlement.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “But the fact that process agreements succeed is by no means a certainty.”

Judge in the Court of the Province Overijssel, Mr. Mr. Ronald van Vuure: “There have now been three cases at the court in Overijssel. The court has always said: ‘We are not against it in principle. However, these three cases did not lend themselves well to it.'[…]”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “In the case of this cannabis plantation, it did not save enough time, according to the court. In a second case, the sentence was too low and in the most recent case only some of the suspects wanted to make procedural agreements. The court found that too complicated. Indeed, courts can decide this themselves each time because this is a new phenomenon and there are no rules established in law.” 

Judge in the Court of the Province Overijssel, Mr. Mr. Ronald van Vuure: “If there are no rules in the law, then the old, normal procedure still applies. That means that the court is not bound by anything and does what it thinks should be done.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “That is a problem, Laura Peters thinks. That is why politicians should legislate on those rules as soon as possible.”

Laura Peters, Criminal law researcher, University of Groningen: “The way in which a criminal trial takes place should be the same throughout the Netherlands. Then there are the considerations that vary from case to case, and policy considerations that come into play. But at the core, the possibilities should be the same. If you can make a settlement proposal for the district court of Limburg, a procedural agreement, but the district court of Noord-Nederland resolutely refuses to do so, then there is inequality in law. That is unwelcome in a democratic society.”

Voice-over Newshour reporters Gert Janssen & Jelle de Gee to us, viewers: “But law or no law, Gitte Stevens, criminal lawyer and public prosecutor Dävid van Kuppeveld are happy with it.”

Dävid van Kuppeveld, public prosecutor: “What’s more, the following cases are already in progress.” […]