Explanation of the terms used by the NRGD when processing your application for (re)registration.
A committee appointed by the Board which advises the Board on the (repeat) applicant’s (degree of) suitability for (repeat) registration.
Natural person submitting an application to the NRGD in order to be (re)registered in the register.
An expert who submits an application to be entered in the register and does not or not yet have an NRGD registration at the time when the application is made.
An application submitted by an expert who at the time of submitting the next application already has a NRGD registration, possibly for a provisional registration.
A member of an Advisory Committee for Assessment.
The Court Experts Board is the body as referred to in Section 51k(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and is charged with managing the register.
Register of Court Experts in Criminal Cases Decree
The NRGD Bureau that supports the Board.
The assessment of another person’s work for the purpose of continuous quality control of a person’s expertise. There is thereby not a hierarchical but a horizontal relationship between colleagues specialised in the same subject area. The reviewer does not sign the report.
All (training) activities that contribute to the ongoing development of knowledge and skills, which is desirable and necessary in order to be able to continue performing the role of court expert in a professional manner.
An individual who issues a report for the administration of justice and/or gives testimony in court.
An expert who has not independently completed and signed the number of case reports required for registration.
A coherent and structured arrangement of organised training activities in which the necessary knowledge and experience are acquired to report as a court expert in criminal law proceedings and that is completed by an exam.
An expert who has independently prepared and signed the required number of case reports.
A structured (interdisciplinary) meeting between people who are working or training in the same professional area, not being an operations meeting. The subject of discussion is in any case the forensic work carried out and the associated problems. The aim is to enhance the expertise of those involved and improve quality of work. Unlike supervision, there is no hierarchical relationship between the participants.
The Netherlands Register of Court Experts of which the Board and the Bureau form part.
The registration of an expert for a period specified by the Board and possibly under certain conditions which must be met within that period. In principle the period to be specified by the Board is two years.
The national public register as referred to in Section 51 k(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which lists the court experts which the Board deems suitable.
An expert who is entered in the register.
Entry in the register.
An expert who at the time of submitting a repeat application already has a NRGD registration, possibly for a provisional registration.
An individual who issues a report for the administration of justice and/or gives testimony in court.
A coherent and structured arrangement of organised training activities in which the necessary knowledge and experience are acquired to report as a court expert in criminal law proceedings and that is completed by an exam.
A reporter who has not independently completed and signed the number of case reports required for registration.
The assessment of another person’s work, the joint consideration of the work and the supervision of a supervisee as part of a training or additional training process. Supervisor and supervisee are thereby in a hierarchical relationship. The supervisor will observe the subject of the investigation (the investigated person) in such a way that they can check the supervisee’s investigation, and can endorse and take responsibility for the conclusions thereof. The supervisor will sign the report in all cases.
Someone who uses the register in order to find and potentially engages a registered expert.
