The basic assumption of the Dutch system is that compensation cannot be exclusively a matter for the criminal courts to resolve. In the legal procedures which have evolved gradually since 1963, emphasis has shifted from social restitution to the position of the victim in criminal proceedings. Legal options permit public prosecutors and judges to return stolen property and to require that damages be paid. Moreover, the victim may also demand damages in criminal proceedings. However, certain problems are inherent in the system of victim compensation through the criminal process. The offender usually cannot be identified, and even if he or she is prosecuted, imposition of a prison sentence may render compensation by the offender improbable. Furthermore, monetary compensation does not solve the problems of the victim. The advantage of transferring victim remuneration suits from criminal to civil courts is that the offender-state conflict is shifted back to a confrontation between the party sustaining damages and the party responsible for those damages. The major disadvantages of this approach are the high costs of civil suits, the danger of the case being transformed into a contest between lawyers, and the long duration of civil suits (average 1 to 5 years). Suggested means of overcoming these difficulties include use of small claims courts and out-of-court negotiations and dispute settlements. Notes and a 23-item bibliography are provided.