No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Netherlands Judicial Decisions involving Questions of Public International Law, 1968–1969*)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 July 2009
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Section C: Documentation
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1970
References
1. Published in Stb. 1967, No. 139
2. Published in Stb. 1896, No. 211
3. Under Art. 31 of the Extradition Act no appeal is possible to the Court of Appeal.
4. According to the text of the judgment, the Director-General of Shipping informed the Minister of Justice by letter of March 11, 1958, No. 47059, IV B/199/4, of the exchange of notes.
5. Published in Stb. 1950, No. K 312
6. Published in Stb. 1949, No. J 570; 69 U.N. T.S. p. 272.
7. Of January 13, 1965, Stb. 1966, No. 461. Art. 43 (1) reads
“Any one who has been denied entry to the Netherlands, or who has been subjected to any measure reserved for aliens, may on that account enter a complaint before the Supreme Court by means of a writ signed by an advocate on the ground that he claims to be a Netherlan s subject, provided that no other way of obtaining a judicial decision has been made poss b e by law.” See infra, p. 263.
8. 31 NRG. ser. p. 715
9. Stb. 1892, No. 268. Art. 8a reads:
“A Dutch woman married to an alien and holding the same nationality as her husband, loses her Dutch nationality by informing the authorities, mentioned in Art. 12a hereof, of her wish to do so.”
10. Treaty of August 26. 1905, published in Stb. 1906, No. 247. 34 NRG 2nd ser. p. 693. Art. 9 (1) and (3) reads:
(1)“Every extradition request shall be accompanied by either: the convicting judgment, even if given in absentia (par défaut ou par contumace), in which case it should have been served in accordance with the laws of the requesting State, or a formal indictment issued by a competent judge on the grounds of which the fugitive can be legally prosecuted.
(3)Of the abovementioned documents either the original or authenticated copies shall be submitted, accompanied by a copy of the law applicable to the offence charged, together with, as far as possible, a description of the person claimed or any other information helping to identify him.”
11. Stb. 1967, No. 139. Art. 18(3) reads:
“The request should be accompanied by:
a. The original or authenticated copy either of an executable sentence against the person whose extradition is requested, or of a warrant of arrest, or similar document of the same legal validity, issued by a competent authority of the requesting State.
Such document should be drawn up in accordance with the law of the requesting State, and should concern the offence in respect of which extradition is requested.
b. A description of the facts (constituting the offence) for which extradition is requested, together with a statement, as accurate as possible, of the time and place of their commission.
c. The text of the relevant legal provisions or, in so far as unwritten law is applicable, an exposition of its content sufficient for considering the request.
d. The particulars necessary to identify the person claimed and – in case of doubt – his nationality”
12. Articles 26(3) and 28(2) and (4) read:
26(3) “Should the person claimed contend that he can immediately demonstrate his innocence of the acts for which his extradition is requested, the Court will investigate such contention.”
28(2) “If the Court finds that … with regard to the person claimed there can clearly be no assumption of guilt concerning the acts for which extradition is requested, the Court will in its judgment disallow extradition.”
28(4) “If extradition be allowed despite the fugitive's contention under Art. 26(3), the Court will set out its findings in this respect in its judgment.”
13. Ibid. Art. 5(3) reads:
“In the case of conviction and sentence in absentia [ to a term of imprisonment of four months or more, to be served in the requesting State – Art. 5(1)(b)– Ed.] extradition will be allowed only when the person whose extradition is requested has been or will still be afforded sufficient opportunity to prepare his defence”.
14. Thereby referring to parliamentary preparatory papers of the Extradition Bill, Bijl.Hand. II 1965/66–8054.
15. Trb. 1962, No. 97 and 1967, No. 183. Art. 11 reads:
“…
2. The request shall be accompanied by:
a. The original or authenticated copy either of an executable sentence, or of a warrant of arrest or any other document of the same legal validity. The documents should be drawn up in accordance with the law of the requesting State.
b. An exposé of the facts (constituting the offence) on which extradition is sought. Time and place of the commission of the facts, their legal qualification and reference to the legal provisions shall be stated as accurately as possible.
c. A copy of the relevant legal provisions, together with a description, as accurate as possible, of the person claimed, and all other information necessary to determine his identity and nationality.”
16. See n. 11 for the text.
17. See n. 12 for the text.
18. See n. 12 for the text.
19. See n. 13 for the text.
20. 213 U.N.T.S. p. 221.
21. Art. 101 reads:
“It is prohibited
(a) to hold a procession on the public road,
(b) to partake in a procession on the public road, without a permit for such procession having been granted as required in these Regulations.”
22. Art. 9(2) deals with the freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs.
23. Art. 168 reads:
“To it [the Council–Ed.] is entrusted the enactment of regulations required in the interest of public order, morals and health, and of regulations required for the management of the municipality.”
24. Art. 6(3)(b) and (c) concerns the right of everyone to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence, and the right to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing.
25. By virtue of Art. 4 Administrative Decisions Appeals Act of 1963 (“Wet beroep administratieve beschikkingen”), appeal to the Crown from an administrative decision is possible.
Cf. Stb. 1963, No. 268.
26. Stb. 1962, No. 370, amended on July 7, 1965, Stb. 1965, No. 303. Art. 2 reads:
“1. Within the meaning of the Act, serious conscientious objections are the insurmountable conscientious objections to military service of anyone whose religious and moral convictions forbid him to participate in any warfare.
2. The objections may be directed against
(a) either military service, specifically related to the use of arms; or
(b) against military service of whatsoever nature.
…”
27. 15 European Yearbook (1967) p. 323.
28. Stb. 1919 No. 524, as amended on June 24, 1965, Stb. 1965 No. 253. Art. 6 reads:
“He who intends slaughter to a beast, gives prior notification thereof in accordance with the instructions laid down by virtue of Arts. 18 and 21.”
29. Trb. 1955, No. 83.
30. Convention concerning Territorial Jurisdiction, Bankruptcy and the Authority and Execution of Judgments, Arbitral Awards and Notarial Acts, Stb. 1929 No. 405; 93 L.N.T.S. p. 431. Art. 6 provides that a court of one contracting State refers a dispute submitted to it to the courts of the other contracting State if that court has already been seized of the case.
31. Stb. 1917, No. 303. Art. 13a reads:
“The jurisdiction of the Courts and the execution of judgments and authentic deeds shall be limited by the exceptions recognized by international law.”
32. See n. 31.
33. Text in Stb. 1951, No. 434.
The Act gives effect to certain frontier corrections determined by the Commission for the Western Frontiers of Germany (consisting of representatives from the U.S.A., Belgium, France, the United Kingdom, Luxemburg and the Netherlands), as laid down in the Protocol of March 22, 1949, agreed upon during the Conference of the said powers in London in May and June 1948.
34. Trb. 1960, No. 68.
35. 2 NR p. 379.
36. 16 NR p. 773.
37. NJ 1965 No. 435 and 4 ILM 1965 p. 257.
38. Hague Court of Appeal, May 24, 1968, Institute's Collection No. R. 655.
39. Besluit Vijandelijk Vermogen of October 20, 944, Stb. E 133.
Art. 2 contains three criteria on the basis of which a juridical person can be declared to be an enemy subject:
(a) Incorporation under the law of an enemy State.
(b) The presence of the administrative centre in enemy territory.
(c) The exercise of the person's main business in enemy territory.
40. 148 BFSP (1947-II) p. 96.
41. 151 BFSP (1948-II) p. 235.
42. Treaty of February 10, 1947, 49 U.N.T.S p. 3.
43. Ibid., 41 U.N.T.S. p. 135.
44. Ibid, 42 U.N.T.S. p. 3.
45. Ibid., 41 U.N.T.S. p. 21.
46. 159 BFSP (1952) p. 226.
47. Of September 8, 1951, 136 U.N.T.S. p. 45.
48. Law of July 20, 1951, Stb. 1951 No. 311, establishing rules relating to the appropriation of enemy property and amending certain provisions of the Decree on Enemy Property (see n. 39).
49. Trb. 1957, No. 84; 399 U.N.T.S. p. 189. Art. 3 reads as follows:
“For the purposes of this Convention the carrier shall be responsible for the acts and omissions of his agents and servants and of any other persons of whose services he makes use for the performance of the carriage, when such agents, servants or other persons are acting within the scope of their employment, as if such acts or omissions were his own.”
50. Trb. 1959, No. 137; 474 U.N.T.S. p. 207. Art. 1(2) reads as follows:
“Decisions rendered in civil and commercial matters by the courts of one of the two States shall have the force of res judicata in the other State if they satisfy the following conditions: …
(2) That recognition of the decision is not contrary to the public policy or principles of public law of the State in which the decision is invoked; …”