�����̨

Joep Lindeman has been appointed full professor of criminal procedure law at Utrecht University as of June 1, 2024. He is appointed during an interesting time for everyone dealing with criminal law in the Netherlands. There will be a significant modernisation in the coming years, and everyone in the criminal justice chain will notice this. A proposal for a new law has recently been brought before parliament. Lindeman: Citizens’ expectations are already high. I really want to monitor the developments regarding the legislative process closely.

Interesting time to become a full professor, for your field of work!

You can say that again! A massive process of legislation is currently underway, specifically concerning criminal procedure law. Everyone dealing with criminal procedure in the Netherlands will be affected. A legislative proposal for a new Code of Criminal Procedure is currently under consideration by parliament (Tweede Kamer). The department of Justice and Security hopes that the new code can enter into force in 2029. This new code holds the rules that the police, the public prosecutor’s office, the judiciary and criminal lawyers have to abide to in their work: starting with the arrest of a suspect and culminating in the judge giving a judgment after which the sentence will be executed. This new legislation is long overdue: the old code will be 100 years old in 2026. It is in desparate need of modernisation.

Being researchers as well as teachers, my colleagues and I are facing some interesting challenges. Students will have to go and use this new law in practice, and we are the ones to teach them!

What is your involvement in this as a researcher?

My colleagues and I have been giving advice (both on request and unsolicited) on drafts of the proposal over the past ten years or so. When the definitive proposal reached parliament, its members asked us to advice them on the consideration of the proposal. Together with a couple of other �����̨-colleagues we formed a joint team with three other universities (Rotterdam, Amsterdam (VU) and Nijmegen). We wrote six reports for parliament on a wide variation of subjects, such as methods of investigation, the trial and remedies. We advised both on feasibility and content. As a result, parliament put forward numerous questions to the responsible ministers. Hopefully, answers will become available before the summer.

What are the most important changes?

The current legislation is hard to understand, even for skilled lawyers. The new code is supposed to be much more accessible, also for laymen. The latter seems like a quite ambitious goal, though. The new code will have to address all kinds of technological developments. These developments pose us for many challenges. New instruments, such as facial recognition software, can put a tremendous strain on fundamental rights.

Obviously, there are also very exciting, and swift, developments around AI. Not only in the field of criminal procedure, I must add. As teachers we are facing a landslide: what is the added value of AI for our students. And what tools should be off-limits?

New instruments for criminal investigations sometimes put a tremendous strain on fundamental rights.

In the adjudication of criminal justice, we must always extensively scrutinise the balance between the public interest in prosecuting crimes and fundamental rights for citizens. The new code aims to reflect this. In addition, another important ambition is to prevent unnecessary delay of the proceedings. The proposal aims at a system in which the defence and the prosecution come to an understanding that all necessary investigation has been completed before the case is brought to trial. In essence, these are nice ambitions, but there are fundamental logistical challenges, such as shortage of staff, partly due to ageing of personnel (in all organisations). We must really face these challengesm though, because procedures can take forever these days.

Are Dutch citizens often disappointed in criminal procedures?

Yes, and while I understand this, in the end I don’t think it is justified. We see so much media coverage on criminal proceedings and politicians often mention them in their campaigns. They promise to be ‘tough on crime’ and propagate a policy of very speedy adjudication. But sometimes the judiciary needs more time for a good judgment. And even when there is much attention for victims and punishment is rather harsh in the Netherlands, people are still claiming that judges are ‘soft’ and that there is too much consideration for personal circumstances of suspects. Furthermore, the police needs to choose how to divide the scarce capacity they have. As an example: not all cases of internet fraud can be attended to. People find that hard to understand. In short: the people are presented with unrealistic promises. And, against their better judgment, politicians just continue making these promises. Which is why I sometimes speak of a ‘Chronicle of a disappointment foretold’.

Politicians make promises against their better judgment. Therefore, I sometimes speak of a ‘Chronicle of a disappointment foretold’.

The same is true for people who become the subject of criminal proceedings themselves. It can be a burden to have to wait long before their case goes to trial. Or their case gets dealt with in extrajudicial proceedings, without them knowing what the consequences of these proceedings are. Subsidized legal aid is not available in all cases and not everyone can afford a lawyer. In these cases, the public prosecutor’s office and/or the judiciary have an important duty in scrutinizing whether the safeguards for a fair trial have been met.  

How do you see the university’s role in your field of expertise?

Research and education are our primary tasks. Our students do not only need to know the law, but they must also be aware of its background, as well as its societal and political context. They must know the opportunities as well as the impossibilities of criminal proceedings. And we will have to explain these to society. I think that, as researchers, my colleagues and I really need to keep a very close eye on the development of the new code. And after its implementation: are there unforeseen or undesired consequences? Did we forget things? We need to have an effective administration of criminal justice, but not at any price.

There will always be dilemmas and tensions. Criminal law is not a cure-all for all societal problems. We need to be aware that society’s view on the law changes. A lot of people find it obvious that coercive measures involving deprivation of freedom (like a detention order) are being used rather easily. But how long can you detain a suspect, who has not been found guilty yet? We will always have to keep in mind that victims, suspects and the society as a whole have fundamental rights that need to be safeguarded.