The intention of the Council for the Judiciary to make many more judgments public than is currently the case has quite a few reservations. There is no legal basis and what the added value is for the professional legal service provider and for the individual citizen remains to be seen. In any case, the Council should ensure that there is a level playing field. Everyone should benefit equally from this enormous amount of information. This is only possible if there is extensive metadata and a powerful search engine accessible to all. Furthermore, there is a danger of limiting legal development if estimating the outcome of proceedings becomes easier. Because not only legal service providers can use the future database but judges will begin to do so as well. Finally, some homework lies ahead to bring the current anonymization guidelines in line with the AVG
In an interview with Henk Naves, president of the Council for the Judiciary, the ambition of the Council for the Judiciary is discussed. The reason for publishing many more judgments is that it fits with a more transparent government, where citizens have better access to information and that this also leads to fairer opportunities for citizens seeking justice.2 There are quite a few comments to be made about this. In this contribution, we address the following questions:
1. What is and what is not published and what numbers are involved?
2. What is the legal framework for publishing court decisions?
3. What is the added value to the professional legal services provider and to an individual citizen if this intention is implemented?
4. What is the legal framework for anonymizing?
5. What technological means present themselves or are necessary for a level playing field and what is the responsibility of the Judicial Council in this regard?
Download the full article here.
