Supreme Court of the Netherlands
|Supreme Court of the Netherlands|
|Hoge Raad der Nederlanden|
|Established||1 October 1838|
|Country||Netherlands, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Aruba|
|Location||The Hague, Netherlands|
|Composition method||Selected by the House of Representatives on advice of the Supreme Court and appointed by royal decree.|
|Authorized by||Constitution of the Netherlands
Statute of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
|Judge term length||Life tenure with mandatory retirement at the age of 70.|
|No. of positions||Varies (currently 36)|
|President of the Supreme Court|
|Since||1 November 2014|
|This article is part of a series on the
politics and government of
The Supreme Court of the Netherlands (Dutch: Hoge Raad der Nederlanden pronounced [ˈɦoːɣə raːdɛr ˈneːdərlɑndə(n)], literally "High Council of the Netherlands") is one of the highest courts of the Netherlands, Curaçao, Sint Maarten and Aruba. The Court was established on 1 October 1838 and sits in The Hague, Netherlands.
The Court is the court of last resort for civil and criminal matters. In certain administrative cases it has final jurisdiction as well, while in other cases this jurisdiction rests with the adjudicative division of the Council of State, the Central Appeals Tribunal (Centrale Raad van Beroep), the Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (College van Beroep van het bedrijfsleven) as well as judicial institutions in the Caribbean part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Court is a court of cassation, which means that it has the competence to quash or affirm rulings of lower courts, but no competence to re-examine or question the facts. It only considers whether the lower courts applied the law correctly and the rulings have sufficient reasoning. In so doing it establishes case law. According to Article 120 of the Constitution, courts may not rule on the constitutionality of laws passed by the States General and treaties. With the exception of constitutional Court of Sint Maarten courts (which rules on constitutionality with regards to the Sint Maarten constitution only) have thus no competence for judicial review with respect to the Constitution.
The Supreme Court currently consists of 36 judges: a president, 6 vice-presidents, 25 justices (raadsheren, literally "Lords of the Council") and 4 justices extraordinary (buitengewone dienst). All judges are appointed for life, until they retire at their own request or mandatorily at the age of 70.
The development of cassation in the Netherlands was heavily influenced by the French during the Batavian Revolution at the end of 18th century. The establishment of the Supreme Court on 1838 brought an end to the Grote Raad van Mechelen and its successor the Hoge Raad van Holland, Zeeland en West-Friesland, which both served as high appellate courts.
|This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (December 2009)|
In the Netherlands a case is first heard by one of the ten district courts (rechtbanken). Afterwards, either side may appeal to one of the four courts of appeal (gerechtshoven). Finally, either party may file a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court.
|This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (December 2009)|
Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed by royal decree, chosen from a list of three, advised by the House of Representatives on the advice of the Court itself. The justices are, like every other judge in the Netherlands, appointed for life, until they retire at their own will or after reaching the age of 70. Upon reaching the age of 60, a justice may change status to extraordinary, with the effect that the justice no longer plays a full role at the Court.
The Supreme Court is divided into four chambers: the first or civil chamber, the second or criminal chamber, the third or tax chamber and the fourth or ombudsman chamber. The members of the fourth division are chosen ad hoc, but will include the President of the Court.
|Numann, ErnstErnst Numann (Vice President)||Civil||2000||1950|
|Bakels, FlorisFloris Bakels (Vice President)||Civil||2003||1949|
|van Buchem-Spapens, AnnemarieAnnemarie van Buchem-Spapens||Civil||1 September 1998||1951|
|Streefkerk, KeesKees Streefkerk||Civil||1 October 2004||1955|
|Heisterkamp, ToonToon Heisterkamp||Civil||1 February 2007||1953|
|Snijders, GerbrantGerbrant Snijders||Civil||1 June 2011||1961|
|de Groot, DinekeDineke de Groot||Civil||1 February 2012||1965|
|Polak, MartijnMartijn Polak||Civil||1 September 2012||1961|
|van den Brink, VincentVincent van den Brink||Civil||1 October 2012||1966|
|Tanja-Van den Broek, TanjaTanja Tanja-Van den Broek||Civil||1 January 2014||1964|
|van Schendel, WillemWillem van Schendel (Vice President)||Criminal||2001||1950|
|van Dorst, LeoLeo van Dorst (Vice President)||Criminal||1999||1949|
|de Savornin Lohman, BonBon de Savornin Lohman||Criminal||1 April 2000||1947|
|de Hullu, JaapJaap de Hullu||Criminal||1 September 2003||1958|
|Splinter-Van Kan, TinekeTineke Splinter-Van Kan||Criminal||24 January 2005||1947|
|Buruma, YboYbo Buruma||Criminal||1 September 2011||1955|
|van de Griend, ElishewaElishewa van de Griend||Criminal||1 February 2014||1963|
|van Strien, NastjaNastja van Strien||Criminal||1 June 2015||1961|
|Faase, EvelineEveline Faase||Criminal||1 September 2015||1958|
|Borgers, MatthiasMatthias Borgers||Criminal||1 January 2016||1973|
|Balkema, JeppeJeppe Balkema[Note 1]||Criminal||1998||1946|
|Ilsink, JanJan Ilsink[Note 1]||Criminal||2003||1946|
|Feteris, MaartenMaarten Feteris (President)||Tax||2008||1960|
|Overgaauw, JacquesJacques Overgaauw (Vice President)||Tax||2008||1951|
|Koopman, RobertRobert Koopman (Vice President)||Tax||1 February 2010||1962|
|van Vliet, DickDick van Vliet||Tax||1997||1946|
|Bavinck, BernardBernard Bavinck||Tax||1 January 2000||1946|
|Punt, LiesbethLiesbeth Punt||Tax||24 January 2005||1962|
|Schaap, CeesCees Schaap||Tax||1 September 2006||1947|
|van Loon, PietPiet van Loon||Tax||1 February 2009||1954|
|Fierstra, MarcMarc Fierstra||Tax||1 June 2009||1959|
|Groeneveld, TheoTheo Groeneveld||Tax||1 February 2012||1948|
|Wortel, JulesJules Wortel||Tax||1 February 2012||1954|
|van Kalmthout, LoekLoek van Kalmthout||Tax||1 June 2013||1955|
|van Hilten, MarikenMariken van Hilten||Tax||1 September 2015||1964|
|Lourens, PeterPeter Lourens[Note 1]||Tax||1999||1946|
|van den Berge, JaapJaap van den Berge[Note 1]||Tax||2001||1948|
- Supernumerary justice.
Second World War
During the German occupation, the Supreme Court kept functioning. In November 1940 the occupiers forced the President, L. E. Visser, to resign because he was Jewish. Visser's colleagues did not protest. The members who remained also signed a compulsory declaration about Aryans.
After the liberation, people reproached the Court for a weak and legalistic attitude. The Court wished above all to guarantee the continuity of its jurisdiction and not to become involved in politics. However such chances as there were to take a stand on principle against the Germans were largely missed. The Justices either omitted to give a moral example or felt they were not in a position to do so. This was demonstrated in a so-called "Test sentence", (Supreme Court, 12 January 1942, NJ 1942/271), in which the Supreme Court ruled that a Dutch judge could not contest the decrees of the occupying force on the basis of international law, in particular the 1907 regulation prescribed for a country at war. In this the Supreme Court followed the advice of the barrister-general A. Rombach. The judgment concerned a case in which a man was sentenced by the economic judge for an "economic offence" (the purchase of pork without valid coupons). The counsel for the accused, P. Groeneboom, argued in his defense before the Supreme Court on 27 October 1941 that the judge had the authority to challenge the regulations of the occupying force on the basis of the regulation prescribed for a country at war, the decree of the Führer and the first regulation of the government commissioner. When the Supreme Court (in a judgment of 12 January 1942) denied the possibility of contesting rules issued by the German government, the Netherlands followed what was the rule in Germany and Italy too. On the basis of two emergency measures Hitler had the authority to issue incontestable rules, and the legal establishment acknowledged not it was not allowed to challenge "political" measures. "Political" in this case was what the political authorities considered to be political. In Italy the Court of Appeal recognized the free authority of Mussolini and the judge's lack of authority to control it. Meihuizen says about the Dutch test sentence: "A sentence with far-reaching consequences because with this, barristers were not given the chance to bring before the judge the question of the validity of legislation which had been issued by or on behalf of the occupier.":85 The Supreme Court defended this sentence in retrospect with the conjecture that the Germans would never accept their decrees being contested and might have intervened in a negative way with the legal establishment, resulting in a further diminishing of citizens' legal protection.
In 1943 the seat of the Supreme Court was temporarily moved from The Hague to Nijmegen. With the liberation of Nijmegen in September 1944, this led to a situation in which, although the seat was on liberated ground, most of the Justices found themselves still in occupied territory. After the war, there was not much done to clear matters; lawyers who had collaborated with the Germans generally kept their jobs or got important other positions. A crucial role in this affair was played by J. Donner, who became President of the Supreme Court in 1946.
- "mr. M.W.C. (Maarten) Feteris, president Hoge Raad". Rechtspraak.nl (in Dutch). Hoge Raad der Nederlanden. Retrieved 16 September 2015.
- In isolation, Raad and der are pronounced, respectively, [raːt] and [dɛr].
- "Nederlandse Antillen en Aruba". Rechtspraak.nl (in Dutch). De Rechtspraak. 27 July 2007. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- "Geschiedenis van de Hoge Raad". Rechtspraak.nl (in Dutch). De Rechtspraak. 18 September 2004. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- "Supreme Court". Rechtspraak.nl. De Rechtspraak. 10 August 2009. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- According to article 120 of the Constitution of the Netherlands, judges will not rule on the constitutionality of laws passed by the States General and treaties.
- For a discussion of judicial review in the Netherlands see J. Uzman, T. Barkhuysen, and M.L. van Emmerik, "The Dutch Supreme Court: A Reluctant Positive Legislator?" (PDF). Retrieved 16 July 2014.
- "The World Factbook". cia.gov.
- "Raad". Rechtspraak.nl (in Dutch). De Rechtspraak. Retrieved 22 January 2016.
- Corjo Jansen en Derk Venema, "The Supreme Court and the Second World War" (in Dutch), Boom, Amsterdam, 2011.
- Derk Venema, "Judges in war time: The Dutch judiciary's confrontation with national socialism and the occupation" (in Dutch), Boom, Amsterdam, 2007.
- Joggli Meihuizen, "Narrow Margins. The Dutch Bar during World War II." (in Dutch), Boom, Amsterdam, 2010 (an English summary was also published by Boom, Amsterdam, 2010).
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Supreme Court of the Netherlands.|