skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 186288 Find in a Library
Title: Rekrutering en (permanente) educatie van de rechtsprekende macht in vijf landen
Author(s): N. J. Baas
Date Published: August 2000
Page Count: 219
Sponsoring Agency: Netherlands Ministerie Van Justitie
2500 Eh the Hague, Netherlands
Sale Source: Netherlands Ministerie Van Justitie
Centrale Recherche Informatiedienst
2500 Eh the Hague,
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Document
Language: Dutch
Country: Netherlands
Annotation: This study by the Dutch Ministry of Justice examined the recruitment and training systems for the judiciary in five countries, with the aim of informing judicial training policy in the Netherlands.
Abstract: The countries compared were the Netherlands, France, Germany, Sweden, and the United States. In all four of the European countries, young lawyers were recruited to participate in the judicial training. In the United States, only experienced lawyers are eligible to become members of the judiciary. Most of the countries studied have a legal ruling or general guidelines that govern training to become a judge; however, in the Netherlands there are neither legal regulations nor national guidelines for training experienced lawyers to become judges. For the theoretical part of the training, all five countries have specialized bodies that are responsible. France is the only country with a single training institute with a legally embedded monopoly position for the training of the judiciary. In all five countries, the courts provide the bulk of training in practice. In all five countries, permanent education is provided at a centralized level and, with the exception of the Netherlands, also at a decentralized level. Some of the courses deal with purely legal topics such as legislative amendments. Others focus on developing social and communicative skills. The courses at the decentralized level sometimes focus on regional topics or are specialized to such an extent that they are only intended for certain categories of judges. In France, Sweden, and the United States, participation in permanent education is compulsory or otherwise encouraged, or the culture within the judiciary is such that almost all judges feel compelled to participate in training. Only in the Netherlands and Germany does participation seem to be less compulsory and less common. In all five countries, there is a link between permanent education and career. Based on the study findings, recommendations are offered for judicial training policy, including centralized coordination of regional or local training, the importance of ongoing (permanent) judicial training, and the need for benchmarks that set goals for training. 18 tables and 34 references
Main Term(s): Court personnel educational programs
Index Term(s): Cross-cultural analyses; Cross-cultural comparisons; France; Germany; Judge selection; Judges; Judicial educational programs; Netherlands; Sweden; United States of America
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.