NVVR judge code

1 Reason and background
1.1 The judiciary is one of the pillars of our democratic rule of law. The case law contributes to maintaining the rule of law and citizens' trust in the law. This is why it is essential that judges have continued trust and authority in the
society. The social role that judges play, the tasks entrusted to them with the far-reaching powers given to them and the associated personal responsibility mean that they must meet high standards.
Dispute resolution by an impartial and independent judge is essential for citizens' confidence in justice, security and justice in society.
This also prevents citizens from taking the law into their own hands. The purpose of judicial review is, among other things, to ensure that laws are complied with, that there is no arbitrariness, that the government complies with the law in its actions and that citizens.
receive legal protection.
Judges have the task of making a fair decision based on all the facts and circumstances in an individual case. They must account for everything that is necessary to perform that task and ensure that they have sufficient access to it.

1.2 The changing view in society of the functioning of the judge and the reflection among judges on what should be considered essential for the judge to function properly have led to the drafting of this code of conduct. In addition to the NVvR's Guide to Impartiality and Guidance on Ancillary Functions1, a written code was also needed due to the growth of the profession and the fact that judges speak multiple justice less than before.
This document aims to be a guide to help judges be aware of their position in society and possible outside interventions and influences. These influences are characterized by a more critical approach to the functioning of judges.
A written code also provides society with insight into how judges shape their functioning. The document reflects current views, but it is intended to be a living document. It does not pretend to answer all the ethical questions a judge may be asked; that is also impossible. However, it is explicitly intended to invite judges to critical self-reflection and to discuss with fellow judges.
Within the NVvR, the question has of course been raised whether, in addition to the Code of Conduct for Jurisdiction (2), drawn up in 2010 by the Council for the Judiciary and the Meeting of Governors, there is room for an own code. That question has been answered with a resounding yes. The Code of Conduct for Judiciary focuses on everyone working in the judiciary, seen from an organizational point of view.
1 Both guidelines can be viewed at www.nvvr.org
2 www.rechtspraak.nl

NVVR Judge Code 2 is understandable and against that background, it is a good initiative. But for the same reason, it is too brief and too general to serve as a guideline for judges who have a special constitutional position in the case law with related far-reaching powers and responsibilities.

1.3 A code of conduct is a translation of core values into behavioral standards. Naming these core values of the case law is therefore important, on the one hand, as a mirror of judges' own functioning and, on the other hand, as a “sign” of what society sees as a person.
can expect justice and the functioning of judges. A number of essential values have been included in various international documents. Let's name a few of them. The Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) drafted the Magna Carta of Judges in 2011. There is also the code of the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary and the Bangalore Principles of judicial conduct. In addition, in its 2010 recommendation (Recommendation cm/Rec (2010) 12), the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe provides an extensive and fairly precise explanation of the scope of judicial independence3.
The NVvR takes as its guideline the following core values for judges, which are considered to be elementary, namely independence, autonomy, impartiality, integrity, expertise and professionalism. These values are found in almost all international documents and in many
codes of conduct can be found in other countries and, translated to the Dutch situation, inspired the behavioral standards described in this document. The values have also been reflected in Dutch legislation.4

1.4 For judges to be able to take the code of conduct as a guide, a number of preconditions must be met. These are included under chapter 3. These preconditions apply to the other two state powers and to the organization of the
jurisdiction.

1.5 The NVVR Judges Code was adopted by the NVvR Members' Council on September 26, 2011.

3 These documents can be found via the websites of the organizations mentioned: www.coe.int/www.encj.eu/www.unodc.org/www.coe.int

4 Including articles 116 and 117 of the Constitution, articles 7, 12, 23.24 and 96 of the Judicial Organization Act and articles 19, 44, 46c and 46l of the Legal Status of Judicial Officials Act (NVVR Judges Code 3)

2 Judge's standards of conduct
Introduction
This code of conduct focuses on judges' own responsibility and on their own awareness of the consequences and impact of their behavior and actions as judges. This code serves as a frame of reference for judicial action that judges can rely on.
focus in carrying out their duties. However, the judiciary can also affect the judge's private life; that is why the code also pays attention to this. Internationally, there are various codes of conduct to which judges have committed themselves.
In terms of its form, this NVVR judge code is in line with the code drawn up by the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ). In addition, the NVVR Judges Code is based on Dutch tradition and culture in terms of content. The essence of the respective core value is shown each time, followed by a translation into behavioral standards.

2.1 Independence
Independent justice is not a magistrate's privilege but a fundamental citizen's right in a democratic rule of law.
Independence reflects the constitutional separation of powers between legislative, executive and judicial powers. Independent jurisdiction ensures that the judge's decision is made free of social, economic or political pressure and that it is based on the judge's own opinion of the relevant facts and legal bases in a specific case. The judge puts the independence given to him5 at the service of society and gives it shape and content with a view to rights and
citizens' freedoms. The judge applies the law to each individual case he hears, without outside fear or coercion. The judge's autonomous position is central to judicial independence. The judge must be able to base his decision

5 Where the masculine form is used, the female form is deemed to be included. in his own opinion without any improper influence on the part of the parties to the proceedings or the public administration and without his opinion being subject to another (not independent in the same sense) body. The judge is guided by the law and his own conscience and sense of justice. The judge ensures that he remains aware of social developments and views and, if necessary, includes them in his opinion, always guided by the independent valuation of relevant facts and interpretation of case law and law.
The judge continuously monitors its own independent judgment. He is aware that certain cases require professional courage on the part of the judge to make a decision that he believes is fair, even though this decision is not widely supported in society. Sometimes the judge is forced to push the limits of the law to make a just decision. The judge understands that his judgment can thus be the subject of discussion in society.

NVVR judge code 4
2.2 Autonomy
On the one hand, the autonomy of the judge gives him the necessary freedom in his judicial functioning and, on the other hand, makes him fully responsible for it.
Autonomy, also referred to as internal independence, refers to the judge's room for movement within his organization. The judge shapes his autonomy through his independent action and independent judgment while being part of an organization that must meet the requirements of efficiency and legality.
The judge is independent and therefore autonomous in his judicial actions with regard to the organization in which he works and the colleagues with whom he works. The judge is responsible for his own decision, even if he consults colleagues before that.
The judge acts with an eye for the importance of timely resolution of cases and at the same time ensures that this does not affect the substantive quality of its decisions.
Taking into account organizational and administrative frameworks, the judge claims control over how he organizes his work.
Because legal development is important and, by extension, striving for legal unity, individual judges can be expected to help shape substantive cooperation with other judges.
On the one hand, legal unity limits the autonomy of judges and, on the other hand, is an important aspect of the quality of justice. The judge is aware of the importance of promoting legal unity by applying the law and, in principle, focusing on recommendations with support among fellow judges, such as the maintenance standards and the subdistrict court formula.
The judge shall justify his decision if he deviates from such recommendations.

2.3 Impartiality
Judicial impartiality is the basis for the equal treatment of parties, which is essential for a fair trial.
The core value impartiality refers to the absence of (the appearance of) bias on the part of the individual judge when assessing a dispute.
The prerequisite for impartial justice is ignoring one's own prejudices, biases and preferences and putting aside any possible self-interest by the judge. Impartial justice is one of the pillars of citizens' trust in the judiciary.
The judge treats the parties from the perspective of an objective observer and visibly equal. Impartiality is not synonymous with indifference.

2.3.1 The judge rules without prejudice or preference. The judge is therefore aware of his personal prejudices and preferences and, when making his judgment, asks himself whether he is free from them. The judge ensures that his behavior inside and outside the courtroom does not jeopardize the public image of impartiality. The judge treats parties equally, taking into account the individuality of each NVVR judge code 5 individual. The judge is aware of the existence of cultures, norms and views other than his own and, if necessary, takes them into account when making his judgment.

2.3.2 Ancillary activities can be strictly personal, administrative, business or political. The judge himself has the responsibility to determine whether ancillary activities can be combined with the performance of the office.
The judge - including the deputy judge - ensures that ancillary positions, former ancillary positions in the previous three years or other activities besides his work as a judge can lead to a conflict of interest or an appearance of conflict of interest. This starting point has already been laid down in the Ancillary Functions Guidelines and further developed there. The judge is over his
ancillary functions are open and transparent and ensures that the register of ancillary relationships is up to date.
Of course, like any other citizen, the judge is free to join a political party. A number of international codes of conduct strongly discourage active participation in politics and are prohibited in a number of countries. Although it is not prohibited in the Netherlands, the judge does not accept a representative position, because he is aware that this may create the appearance of partiality.

2.3.3 The judge avoids any appearance of partiality in the eyes of an objective observer. The judge prevents the appearance of partiality by not administering justice in matters that affect or concern his personal, administrative or business relationships. This also applies to former relationships.
The judge shall avoid that the performance of the tasks assigned to him will result in him being involved in the same case in different capacities. The judge is aware that his impartiality may come into question because of his previous involvement as a judge in a particular case and when he repeatedly deals with cases between the same party (s).
The judge withdraws or abides in cases where he foresees, on the basis of facts or circumstances, that justified fears may arise as to his impartiality. In principle, the judge is transparent to the parties about the reason for compensation. The judge sees objection as an instrument at the service of parties that can improve the quality of justice.
Finally, the judge is alert that (secondary) functions of his partner or close relatives can also influence his impartiality or cause the appearance of partiality. In light of this section, the Judge's Impartiality Guidelines, where that principle has been further developed, deserves mention.
NVVR judge code 6

2.4 Expertise and professionalism High-quality justice requires professional and competent judges.
A competent judge has the necessary knowledge and skills. In addition to a thorough knowledge of current law, other aspects, such as technical expertise, as well as professional performance, are also important.
That is why the professionalism of the judge also includes the attitude and skills as a judge and thus contributes to the trust that citizens have in the case law.

2.4.1 The judge is competent in matters that he judges and returns a case if he does not consider himself to be sufficiently competent. It is the judge's own responsibility to be and remain an expert. To this end, the court follows national and international developments that are important for its own field of law. When necessary, the judge specializes in a specific area of law. The judge acknowledges his own responsibility to continuously train and to evaluate the quality of the courses he takes.

2.4.2 The judge has a professional attitude to work and the skills necessary to deal adequately with the cases brought before him. The judge does his job with dedication and realizes that timeliness in resolving cases also determines the quality of justice. The judge understands the major influence that his decision can have on the lives of those directly involved and on society. The judge therefore gives each case the necessary care and attention.
The judge is always responsible for the quality of his decision. The judge knows when to make use of external experts, knows how to ask them the right questions and knows how to adequately assess their contribution on its merits. The judge is aware that professionalism also means realizing that consulting colleagues and intervision can increase the quality of his own performance. The judge is therefore open to feedback from colleagues.
In turn, he himself is willing to give feedback to colleagues.
The judge treats the employees who support him with respect and gives them sufficient space to contribute their experience and expertise. In doing so, the judge ensures that he is ultimately responsible for his decision.

2.4.3 The judge respects the litigants and other parties involved, such as the victim in the criminal process. The judge creates the right atmosphere in the courtroom.
The judge has the necessary communication skills to lead the hearing and the ability to resolve conflicts in the most appropriate way. The judge has an eye for the interests of everyone involved in a case. The judge has a listening capacity and treats parties in a professional manner, so that parties feel heard and taken seriously.
At the hearing, the judge provides parties with understandable information about the course of events and the (further) course of the proceedings. The judge only asks those questions that are necessary for his judgment in the context of resolving the conflict.
The judge is transparent in its judgment. It is clear to the parties what the judge's opinion is and the justification provides insight into the reasons for reaching the verdict. In doing so, the judge ensures a good balance between society's need to receive information and the privacy of those involved.
The judge is able to communicate well with parties and other actors in the case law. He knows how to deal adequately with the presence of media in court. When he goes public with NVVR judge code 7, he is aware of the professional role he plays and has thought beforehand what influence his message can have. The judge is different than in the capacity of
press judge or in scientific publications in public does not comment on statements made by colleagues.

2.5 Integrity
Judicial integrity is an essential prerequisite for legitimising the case law.
The judge sets himself high standards when it comes to integrity, because it is his job to ensure that others comply with the law. This core value encourages the judge, even under pressure, to keep their back straight and to go against the grain if necessary. Society expects the judge to lead by example, precisely because it is the job of the judge to ensure that others comply with the law. In this way, he can maintain the necessary authority in society and the trust of citizens.
earn. Honest behavior is an essential prerequisite for the design of the other core values.

2.5.1 The judge is unbreakable, i.e. not blackmailable and not bribery.
The judge does not make improper use of the resources made available to him in his office. He does not accept gifts that he knows or should suspect are being given to influence his decision in a concrete case or future case. The judge treats information that he becomes aware of in his position as a judge with integrity and strictly complies with his
confidentiality obligation.
The judge does not let hierarchical relationships play a role in his court decisions and ensures that his rank or length of service does not influence or hinder colleagues in their decisions.
The court has the task of making a just decision, even when strict application of the law seems to prevent this. The judge is firm when his decision contradicts the views of a majority or a minority in society. Where necessary, this requires the courage to say: “so far and no further”.
The requirement of integrity also means that the judge will hold the organization accountable if he is not sufficiently facilitated to deal with a particular case, is not himself adequately equipped to close the case, or if the workload impairs the quality of his decisions. The judge does this out of his own responsibility for the proper administration of justice.

2.5.2 The judge is not biased in cases where he judges and does not grant any privileges to parties. Through his professional and personal performance, the judge ensures that he does not damage the public image of the
jurisdiction, the judicial organization and the office of judge.

2.5.3 The judge behaves prudently and respectfully. The judge shows this by the way he treats the parties at the hearing. The judge responds politely, sincerely and tactfully to parties and other factors in the case law. The judge not only pays attention to his own behavior, but also has a signaling function. Integrity also means that the judge calls colleagues on unfair behavior.

NVVR judge code 8
2.5.4 Due to his public function, the court is subject to high standards. At the same time, the judge has the right to a private life. The judge seeks a balance between the demands placed on him and his personal life. The judge ensures that his social activities do not harm the proper performance of his duties. The judge, like everyone else, has the right to his own opinion. However, the judge realizes that he will soon be considered a representative of the judiciary in the public eye and that public action may damage his authority as a judge and the authority of the judiciary as a whole. In any case, he therefore does not speak out publicly on matters that still have to be decided by a court. Furthermore, unlike as a press judge and in scientific publications, the judge only exceptionally appears in his function. The judge is reluctant to use social media and realizes that using it can lead to making undesirable connections.

NVVR judge code 9
3 Preconditions for the optimal functioning of the judge
The judge is part of society and functions in an organizational context with others and not as a loner. A number of preconditions must therefore be met for the judge to function properly: the judge cannot function properly if he is not enabled to do so by the government and the judicial organization.

3.1 External preconditions to be fulfilled by the other two state powers (legislative and executive powers).
In light of the separation of powers, the judiciary has a special position where the starting point is that for the rule of law to function properly, the judiciary has an independent, separate and equal position in the state. The
guarantees for the judiciary, laid down in the Constitution, articles 116, paragraphs 4 and 117, and in organic laws, place the judiciary functionally independent from parliament and government.
Independent justice is designed by individual judges. It is up to the legislator to create a legal framework that guarantees independent jurisdiction. Laws must be testable and workable. In order not to disrupt the system of checks and balances, it is important that the three state powers respect each other in their roles.

3.2 Internal preconditions, to be fulfilled by the organization of justice.
Influenced by developments in the field of business management, justice is also increasingly regarded as a service that is provided to citizens and that must be offered as efficiently and effectively as possible. Of course, the organization of justice must meet the requirements of efficiency and legality. However, the pressure placed on the courts by business management notions such as lead times and case budgets should not mean that the judge does not feel free to make a good decision in a particular case correctly. A balance between content and business practices promotes the quality of case law, including timeliness, of course.
In the first instance, it remains the judge's own responsibility to administer cases properly. The organization must facilitate him to carry out his task in accordance with this responsibility.
The application of recommendations or guidelines by the court can serve the legal entity. This is why it is essential that these recommendations or guidelines have maximum support among judges. This can be promoted by organizing the discussion about this primarily at court level and then bringing that discussion to a national level from the courts in order to strive for national legal unity. The council and boards should facilitate the courts in this regard.
In order to ensure independence and impartiality, an objective and transparent system of case allocation is needed. In consultation with the judges, the organization must ensure that such a system is created. The judge himself is responsible for maintaining his knowledge, but the organization gives the judge the opportunity to acquire and maintain the necessary skills. In this regard, judges consider the current standard of at least thirty hours of study per year to be an absolute minimum. The quality of the ('in-company') courses for judges organized or opened by the organization must be NVVR Judge Code 10
are guaranteed by means of an evaluation and quality system. If the judge finds that he needs more, the organization should in principle accommodate him. The organization has a facilitating role. In addition, the manager can form an opinion about how the judge shapes how to maintain his knowledge and skills. Where necessary, the organization may focus on training and expertise. By making an individual training plan mandatory, the organization focuses the individual judge's attention to training and expertise.
Although it is the judge's own responsibility to determine whether he has sufficient expertise to deal with a particular case, the board of a judicial board can control the dissemination of knowledge. This is done, for example, by implementing a rotation policy. In addition, attention must be paid to the possible destruction of specific knowledge where the judge worked before he rotated. After rotation, the judge should be given sufficient opportunity to learn the new jurisdiction. More generally, the organization must ensure that the judge does not feel compelled to deal with cases in an area where he is (still) insufficiently versed.
The organization must ensure that, in principle, it is only decided voluntarily that judges should rotate, while judges can be expected to include the interests of the organization in their consideration. Rotation as a punitive measure is inadmissible.