The Netherlands: A No-Nonsense Approach to Civil Procedure Reform
In the Netherlands, significant changes to the procedural regulations and other policy reforms have thoroughly reshaped the legal system over the past decades. Much more attention than before is directed to gathering data and to conducting empirical research in order to assess some of these changes. The role of the judge regarding case management seems to be of greater significance today than in the early 1990s. Judges have the authority to control the progress of lawsuits. It is now common for judges to schedule oral hearings at an early point in time at which the judge will order the parties themselves to appear in court in order to discuss the case. In the Dutch legal system, some preliminary steps have also been taken to promote mediation.
De daad bij het woord
Uit het onderzoek moet blijken in hoeverre hetgeen in een gerechtelijke procedure wordt opgelegd (door de rechter) of afgesproken (tussen partijen) ook werkelijk wordt uitgevoerd. In gevallen waarin de uitkomst van de procedure niet wordt nageleefd, wordt nagegaan wat daarvan de oorzaken zijn en in hoeverre dit duidt op een ‘ineffectieve’ rechtsgang. In de analyse wordt onderzocht in hoeverre naleving en (in)effectiviteit samenhangen met kenmerken van rechtsgang. Tot die kenmerken behoren onder meer de wijze waarop de dagvaarding is betekend, het houden van comparitie na antwoord en het verrichten van onderzoek tijdens de procedure.
The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice ten years on: Successes and future challenges under the Stockholm Programme. CEPS Paperbacks. June 2010
This book celebrates the tenth anniversary of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) by bringing together the views of key practitioners and policy-makers who have played an outstanding role in thinking about and shaping EU policies on freedom, security and justice. 
 
Ten years ago, the member states transferred competences to the EU for law and policy-making in the fields of immigration, asylum and border controls, and began the transfer process for criminal justice and policing. This decade of European cooperation on AFSJ policies has experienced very dynamic convergence, the enactment of a large body of European law and the setting-up of numerous EU agencies working in these domains. Such dynamism in policy-making has not been without challenges and vulnerabilities, however. As this collective volume shows, the main dilemmas that lie ahead relate to an effective (while more plural) institutional framework under the Treaty of Lisbon, stronger judicial scrutiny through a greater role for national courts and the Court of Justice in Luxembourg, better mechanisms for evaluating and monitoring the implementation of EU AFSJ law and a more solid fundamental rights strategy. The contributions in this volume address the progress achieved so far in these policy areas, identify the challenges for future European cooperation in the AFSJ and put forward possible paths for making more progress in the next generation of the EU’s AFSJ.