Recent white papers conclude that there has been a tendency for Dutch diversion programs to be transformed into primary modes of punishment by codifying them and having them imposed by a judge. This move from diversion back to punishment might well diminish intended rehabilitative effects, because the negative effects of a fully penal sanction are taken aboard. This can be avoided if the prosecutor is required to settle a problem outside the penal process if possible; and if a case is effectively dealt with outside of formal processing, the right to prosecute should be lost. A second guiding principle should be that an alternative sanction is used only as a replacement for imprisonment; this can be ensured if alternative sanctions are only considered when a custodial sentence is the likely option. Other proposed principles are that any offender should have the right of appeal against any decision that would prevent diversion or the completion of diversion; diversion should only be used when the offender agrees to participate; and no category of offenses or offenders should be excluded from participation in alternative schemes. 9 notes and 39 references