The Netherlands Public Prosecution Service is responsible for investigating and prosecuting criminal offences
For a society to function efficiently and fairly laws are needed. People are not, for example, allowed to use violence, steal or damage property, and there are rules to ensure traffic safety. If someone fails to respect the law, someone else may lodge a complaint with the police. Or the police can arrest the offender. A suspect may also be arrested by a member of the public if they are caught in the act.
In the Netherlands, only judges and – in minor cases – the public prosecution service may impose punishment. Crucially, a person may be punished only if it has been established that he or she is in fact guilty of the offence in question. Doing this requires investigation and an independent judiciary.
After all, in our democracy governed by the rule of law, justice is a core value. Suspects, victims and society as a whole must have the confidence that they will be properly represented in criminal proceedings. The sentence must also be in proportion to the crime that was committed and provide justice for those affected by it.
The Public Prosecution Service is responsible for investigating and prosecuting criminal offences on behalf of society at large. Its work is aimed at ensuring that those who commit crimes are punished appropriately, that victims and next of kin feel that someone is on their side, and that the Dutch public are confident that the law of the Netherlands are applied fairly and correctly.
The Public Prosecution Service and the courts together make up the judiciary. The Public Prosecution Service is responsible for the enforcement of criminal law. It is the only institution that decides who has to appear before a criminal court and on what charge.
The Public Prosecution Service’s main tasks are:
supervising the police in the investigation of criminal offences
prosecuting criminal offences and bringing suspected offenders before the courts
dealing with criminal offences without involving the courts
The Public Prosecution Service concerns itself only with criminal law. It therefore has no involvement in civil matters such as rent disputes, labour issues or divorce proceedings.
The investigation of Mr Slobodan Praljak’s death has been completed. The defendant Praljak committed suicide last year in the court room of the Yugoslavia Tribunal after the court had passed its sentence against him. The investigation has nog shown in what way and at what point in time Mr Praljak had obtained the potassium cyanide he used. No criminal offences were established.
Istraga o smrti Slobodana Praljka je zatvorena. Nakon što je sud izrekao presudu protiv njega, osumnjičenik Praljak je prošle godine oduzeo sebi život u sudnici Tribunala za bivšu Jugoslaviju. Istraga nije pokazala na koji način i u kom trenutku je Praljak dobio kalij-cijanid koji je popio. Nije utvrđeno da je počinjeno kazneno djelo.
The JIT has taken note of the information that has been publicly presented by the authorities of the Russian Federation for the first time today. Already in 2014 the JIT has requested the Russian Federation to provide all relevant information. In May 2018 the JIT specifically requested information concerning numbers found on several recovered missile parts.
The National Public Prosecutors' Office (OM) asked the District Court Noord-Nederland on Thursday 6 September to ban No Surrender and related chapters and brotherhoods, and to officially disband the association. The request was filed with the civil court in Assen because one of the few official chapters of No Surrender is located in Emmen.
ING Bank N.V. (ING) in Amsterdam has accepted and paid a settlement of EUR 775,000,000 offered by the Netherlands Public Prosecution Service (Openbaar Ministerie, hereinafter referred to as NPPS). The NPPS has accused ING in the Netherlands of having violated the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing Act (Wet ter voorkoming van witwassen en financieren van terrorisme, hereinafter referred to as the AML/CTF Act) for many years and on a structural basis. This took place in such a way that the bank is also accused of culpable money laundering: the bank failed to prevent bank accounts held by ING clients in the Netherlands between 2010 and 2016 from being used to launder hundreds of millions of euros.