NRGD 2024 Annual Plan

The Netherlands Register of Court Experts is the forensic quality standards organisation for the judicial system in the Netherlands. Collaboration in the Netherlands and abroad is of paramount importance in this regard. The NRGD ensures that forensic experts and their reports satisfy national and international standards. As a result, stakeholders can be confident of the quality of forensic expert examinations.

As an independent and transparent organisation, the NRGD promotes and guarantees the quality of the forensic expertise. It also fosters the development of the quality of the field of forensics as a whole. The NRGD focuses on regulation, advice and knowledge exchange.

Facilitating quality

The NRGD facilitates forensic expertise by developing quality standards for a broad range of fields of expertise, in collaboration with experts and national and international partners in the forensic system. For each field of expertise, uniform, objective and transparent standards are set with regard to the required knowledge, experience and professional attitude.

These quality standards aim to promote further knowledge development. Therefore, the standards set will be continuously revised to facilitate professionalisation. Through a step-by-step process, this tightening, expansion and updating of the standards will enable us to further develop and enhance the quality of the experts already registered and those who join the register. In addition, we promote further and refresher training to establish continuous quality assurance and enable efficiently organised assessment and reassessment.

Quality assurance

The NRGD assures the quality of forensic expertise by assessing the expertise of those who wish to be registered against the standards set for the relevant field. This assessment is repeated every five years, against the standards then in force. This is done in individual assessments or through the certification of courses. The Board of Court Experts decides on admission to the register and also has the power to proceed with removal from the register if an expert no longer meets the standards or the code of conduct.

Making quality transparent

The NRGD makes forensic expertise transparent, for example by making the details of registered experts publicly available. The NRGD is also available for queries from users and experts, and while it does not liaise between experts and those seeking the services of experts, the NRGD can make its knowledge in this area available.

Updating standards

Forensic Psychiatry, Psychology and Child and Youth Care Sciences (FFPO)

In 2024, the FFPO assessment framework will be evaluated and, if necessary, modified. This will include revisions of relevant guidelines.

Forensic Medical Examination

The Forensic Medical Examination field of expertise (which is separate from forensic pathology) was opened up for registration applications on 1 December 2021. The first assessments took place in 2022 and 2023, and the first cohort of forensic physicians were registered in the NRGD. The focus in 2024 will be on evaluating the standardisation process and further developing the field.

Weapons and Ammunition

With a view to the possibilities for counter-expertise, the NRGD also tries to attract experts from outside the NFI for each field of expertise. A start was made on this in autumn 2023, with a presentation at the annual meeting of the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) working group on Firearms/GSR. New contacts have been made with international experts and their input will be used to work out the extent to which the assessment framework needs to be updated, possibly in conjunction with the Gunshot Residue Examination assessment framework.

Digital Forensics

An analysis relating to, amongst other things, the size and structure of the Digital Forensics field of expertise, was started in 2023. This analysis will be completed in 2024 and, if necessary, the assessment framework will be changed accordingly.

Legal Psychology

At last year’s annual conference of the European Association of Psychology and Law in Romania, a round-table session was organised on safeguarding forensic quality in various European countries, focusing specifically on legal psychology. In addition, a number of new assessors were appointed. Following an evaluation of a series of assessments, a start was made on clarifying the Assessment Framework on a number of points. It is also being examined to what extent the second sub-field Deception Detection is still relevant, because this expertise is not used in the Dutch judicial system. At the same time, it is being examined whether the other two sub-fields are adequate. In late 2023, a professional meeting between lawyers and legal psychologists was organised to continue the dialogue on the role of legal psychology in the judicial system. There will be a follow-up meeting in 2024.

Gunshot Residue

The Gunshot Residue field of expertise was opened up at the end of 2022. For this field, 2023 was dedicated to assessing and registering the first experts. In 2024, opportunities will be explored to attract more experts to apply for registration. Input from experts will also be used to assess the extent to which the assessment framework needs to be updated, possibly in conjunction with the Weapons and Ammunition Assessment Framework.

Weapons and Ammunition Act

It will be considered whether the final report of the committee on the Weapons and Ammunition Act has consequences for the field of expertise. There will also be a focus on exploring opportunities for recruiting new assessors and expanding the pool of experts. Given the specifically national legal framework of this field of expertise, this exploration will be limited to the Netherlands.

Forensic Financial Investigation

In 2024, the field of expertise will be opened up and the first assessments can take place. New fields of expertise.

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (BPA)

Bloodstains have long played a role in police investigations, but since the 1950s, bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) has been applied through the use of biology, fluid dynamics and mathematics. In the past 15 years, the field has been provided with scientific underpinning, which is reason for the NRGD to standardise it. In 2024, the NRGD will work to open up the BPA field of expertise, assessors will be sought and experts will be assessed.

Forensic Radiology

Together with experts from the field, the Bureau will standardise this field of expertise. The standardisation of this field will be carried out based on the results of the New Fields Survey, in which the various professional parties are asked which new fields awaiting standardisation should be given priority. With standardisation, the investigation of the cause of death, which also encompasses Pathology, Forensic Medical Examination and Toxicology, would be standardised in the Netherlands by the NRGD.

The NRGD will also work in 2024 on the registration and re-registration of experts in criminal cases. This concerns processing applications for registration or re-registration in already standardised fields of expertise as well as new fields of expertise. A total of around 170 applications for registration or re-registration are expected in 2024. Some 40 newly trained behavioural experts are also expected to start work. In addition, the NRGD expects that with the new policy on recognition, the newly trained behavioural experts employed by the NFI (around 15 per year) will be able to start employment with an administrative assessment. This brings the total to around 185 applications for registration or re-registration.

As regards forensic expertise, there is no clear distinction between criminal law and administrative and civil law. Forensic knowledge is used in many different areas of the law, such as handwriting, digital forensics, kinship analysis or forensic financial investigation.

A statutory basis is required for formal expansion to administrative and civil law. This has been under discussion for many years. In 2023, the Judiciary submitted an Integral Assessment Framework (IAK) in which it expressed its explicit desire to create the same safeguards for the quality of experts in administrative and civil law as currently apply in criminal law. This development is endorsed by the administration department. It is desirable for a decision to be made in 2024.

In that context, it is also important to mention that the Ministry of Security and Justice has asked the NRGD to consider the extent to which it sees possibilities for including mediators in its register. NRGD has responded positively and declared its willingness to take on this task should it be requested, in view of its experience in drawing up quality standards. This development is in line with the move towards a quality register serving the entire judicial system. The recognition policy (see 2.4 below) has proven to be an appropriate tool to assess and monitor quality assurance systems. This does mean that the aforementioned statutory basis should also be considered in this context. This can be tied in with the expansion to civil and administrative law.

In 2023, the NRGD signed an agreement with the NFI to move towards recognising the NFI’s training programme. Recognition of the training programme by the NRGD benefits both the NFI and the NRGD. This recognition will reduce the double assessment – the examination by the NFI to become authorised to sign and the assessment by the NRGD – to one single assessment. The assessment will then be conducted at the NFI, with an external examiner, who is an expert in the relevant subject, sitting on the examination committee on behalf of the NRGD. In the fourth quarter of 2023, an independent inspection committee will assess the NFI’s training and examinations, combining the specialisations DNA and forensic pathology. In 2024, the NFI’s other six specialisations will also be registered in the NRGD.

In the interests of the judicial process, the register (in line with the wish of the Minister and the House of Representatives) tries to offer a wide range of experts. In the Dutch context, this means that it has included NRGD experts from various employers in its register. However, the number of experts from private providers is still very limited.

With the transfer of activities from the NFI to the private market, the number of experts for counter-expertise will increase in the future. What is important here is that these experts, where they are subject to the law, are also required to register with the NRGD, so that the quality of these experts is guaranteed in court.

There needs to be additional emphasis on the smaller fields of expertise in particular, such as Handwriting Analysis, but certainly also in the fields of expertise focused on Dutch legal practice (e.g. the Weapons and Ammunition Act and gunshot residues), in order for a sufficient number of experts to be registered. For the actions the NRGD intends to take in relation to these fields, see under 2.1.

The NRGD participates in a Sourcing working group that was set up, amongst other things, to come up with proposals for spending the available budget in such a way that it leads to the retention of second opinions.

Over the past 14 years, the NRGD has established a position in the dynamic field of forensic expertise. This is true not only in relation to the individual standards, but also increasingly with regard to safeguarding forensic quality as a whole. Due to our experience and independent position, we can be of added value in such cases, in line with the vision from 2018.

The Ministry has asked the NRGD to advise on how further quality assurance can be encouraged. We want to explore the possibilities in consultation with system partners and the Ministry.

The NRGD believes that a distinction must be made between factual investigation and interpretative investigation.

In DNA analysis, for example, it is important to make a clear distinction between the establishment of a profile (which is factual) and the interpretation of complex profiles, and especially what relationship there is between the location where the DNA was found and the circumstances of the crime (see the Putten murder case). This is also an issue in toxicology. There, one must make a distinction between determining what substance is found in the piece of evidence and what its (possibly fatal) effect was on the victim (see the Lucia de B case). An example in digital analysis is the interpretation of complex data (Deventer murder case).

In the interests of the judicial system, as far as interpretative investigation is concerned, it ought to be a requirement to be registered in, or certified by, the NRGD, regardless of who is conducting this type of investigation. This is also in line with the development in ISO and the recently published guidance of the Forensic Science Regulator for England and Wales.

For fields of expertise not included in the register, the NRGD offers guidance to safeguard the quality of the use of court experts in the judicial system. In 2020, the NRGD published five tools on its website that can be used to improve the quality of reports by court experts who have rarely or never reported in criminal cases. A key tool is Report Feedback, in which an experienced NRGD assessor also reads the court expert’s report and checks it for consistency and comprehensibility, for example.

The NRGD will also facilitate Report Feedback in 2024. In addition, it will investigate whether and how the Ad Hoc-tools could be put in place and used throughout Europe.

For a number of years, the Ministry of Justice and Security has been working to modernise the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure. Following a consultation round, the current regulation on experts will also be closely examined. An initial version saw the light in 2022. The NRGD is committed to making a clear distinction between factual and interpretative investigation, with appropriate quality assurance.

The benefits of knowledge development are twofold. Actively communicating with applicants and users about quality issues not only increases their knowledge but also encourages them to work on the quality of their own work. In addition, it is essential for the NRGD to keep in touch with the field in this way, so that it can find out whether the standards and requirements that we set for each field of expertise are still up-to-date.

The NRGD’s vision calls for the active promotion of quality. The criminal justice system plays a key role in this effort. After all, each in their own way, system partners are involved to a greater or lesser extent in quality assurance. They still often treat operational coordination and knowledge exchange as separate matters. It is therefore important, both bilaterally and throughout the system, and with respect for everyone’s role, to seek the connection between the two.

In collaboration with Maastricht University, NRGD has conducted a survey of Dutch criminal defence lawyers. With the survey, the NRGD wants to obtain information about:

1. experience of and any problems relating to the appointment of a court expert (whether or not NRGD-registered)
2. how well-known the NRGD is within criminal defence law practice
3. where the needs of criminal defence law practice lie in relation to the work of the NRGD.

The results of the Survey of the Legal Profession will be incorporated into an article. Furthermore, in 2024 the outcomes will be translated into specific plans to ensure that the NRGD’s role is better aligned to professional practice.

It is essential that the NRGD remain well-informed about developments in the individual fields, keep in touch with existing assessors and make contact with new assessors. We also call for quality assurance to be highlighted through presentations and abstracts. In 2024, the NRGD will also actively maintain contacts with ‘the professional field’. Either in person or online, the NRGD speaks at forensic conferences, such as the European EAFS conference and the worldwide IAFS and IABPA, takes part in project teams, disseminates information through guest lectures, and is open to other ways of sharing knowledge.

In the context of operations, it is important to realise that the NRGD is limited in size (10 FTE). The NRGD meets its policy objectives within the possibilities of a small organisation (comply or explain).

Within the framework of continuous self-reflection, the NRGD will continue the evaluation begun in 2023 and/or the further development of a number of processes. This involves, amongst other things, looking at the assessment procedure (in collaboration with Cito), the organisational structure (based on the advice from Van de Bunt) and the communication strategy.

For financial management, we work together with other independent Justice and Security organisations. For purchasing, we use master contracts where possible.

The NRGD complies with the Senior Executives in the Public and Semi-Public Sector (Standards for Remuneration) Act.

There is a performance appraisal interview with employees twice a year, one of which is for P-Direkt (documentation software).

Partly due to its limited size, the NRGD has to be able to respond structurally to developments (agility). For example, the organisation keeps job specialisation to a minimum and has the fewest possible organisational layers. However, the extent to which implementation aspects can be clustered will be examined. Employees are given many opportunities for further development. Every year, we consider whether work should be redistributed. There is also ample opportunity for training. Membership of a partnership of some 40 smaller implementing organisations (KleinLef) also leads to participation in various projects and a network for knowledge exchange.

We do not expect any changes in accommodation for the time being. Our location is up-to-date, centrally situated, easily accessible by public transport and suits our independent position. With the Ministry, the intention is to bring the NRGD into the speciality government building system, as this more in line with its position and fee structure.

In 2023, as part of data minimisation, the NRGD evaluated what data it collects and considered what measures could be taken. Data that the NRGD is permitted to collect, but does not need for its primary process, will no longer be collected and stored. An independent state of privacy measures is prepared and published by the Data Protection Officer every two years.

In 2023, the NRGD fully implemented the selection list of the Board of Court Experts in the case system and the first batch of files that were eligible for destruction according to the selection list have been destroyed. This will continue in 2024, so that the NRGD remains compliant with the Archives Act.

Digitisation of the archive was completed in 2023. The NRGD’s work is now exclusively digital, so there is only a digital archive. Where there is still correspondence by post, documents are digitised immediately and paper copies destroyed.

Following the back office and applications, 2023 saw the start of the roll-out of the My NRGD portal, which enables applicants to apply, communicate with the NRGD and track the status of the application and/or registration live through a single digital portal. In 2024, development of the My NRGD portal will be completed and a link to Digi-D will be requested. However, the ever-increasing cost of working digitally and meeting the understandable but growing requirements is a concern.

In 2024, the website will be audited for accessibility to visually impaired persons.

The NRGD website is hosted through the Dutch government platform ‘Platform Rijksoverheid Online’. It is connected to the government-wide solution for web archiving and fully complies with established internet safety standards. The NRGD will remain compliant with these standards in 2024. This also applies to the NRGD’s e-mail addresses.

In 2024, the NRGD will continue to comply with the requirements of the Dutch Open Government Act and will align itself with the register of government organisations. The NRGD publishes policy through its own website and in 2024, it will provide referral through the Register of Government Organisations. Information related to applications and individuals is excluded  from publishing by law.

The NRGD aims to further implement information security policy in 2024. In doing so, the NRGD aims for a maturity level of at least level 4 of 5.

The case system is structured to meet the requirements of data governance and data management. Retention and destruction periods have been implemented in the case system in accordance with the established selection list of the Board of Court Experts.

Where the NRGD has implemented the primary process in the case system, it will focus on setting up the case system for secondary processes in 2024.

The NRGD workspace is arranged through the Shared Service Centre-ICT (SSC-ICT) and is therefore part of the protected Ministry of Justice and Security network. The NRGD only uses applications that comply with prescribed security and privacy standards, regularly checks whether applications and providers are still compliant and, where possible, joins government-wide facilities.

Applications can only be accessed via the secure Ministry of Justice and Security network (IP-restricted access) and traffic is monitored 24/7 by the SOC of SSC-ICT. Access to applications is granted according to the established authorisation policy.

Ministry advice has also been sought regarding the steps that have to be taken for the purposes of Open Government. In 2024, the NRGD and the Ministry will work together to identify these steps.

*budget 2174 plus 36 from 2023

In 2019, the NRGD was allocated additional budget. This amount was allocated to the NRGD at the time due to the growth of the register up to 2019. Further growth is expected because the register is not yet complete. We are now four years down the road, with four more fields of expertise, which means maintaining four additional fields while developing new ones. This makes the situation very tight with regard to staff capacity. Especially if other costs such as ICT/security costs increase, the NRGD will run the risk that further development of the registry will stagnate. For 2024, this can be absorbed by lower costs of assessment committees and by a contribution to ICT costs. However, a structural solution is needed for the long term (after 2024).