Whistleblowers at the Judicial Information Service (Justid) have warned that the number of identity errors in Dutch court verdicts is far higher than previously reported, potentially leaving thousands of innocent citizens with criminal records while actual offenders escape punishment. The revelations come nearly a year after the Court of Audit first flagged the issue as a serious problem.
The scale of the problem
The Court of Audit identified 876 cases where names in criminal verdicts were incorrectly recorded, with 141 involving serious crimes including murder, sexual offences, drug trafficking, terrorism, and violent crimes. However, whistleblowers speaking to De Telegraaf say this represents only a fraction of the true extent.
"This is just the tip of the iceberg," Marleen de Wilde, a Justid employee who has worked at the service for five years, told the newspaper. An anonymous colleague estimated the real figure could be "possibly around 50,000 cases."
De Wilde said she requested a fact-finding investigation when she first recognised the scale of the problem upon joining Justid, but her concerns were dismissed. She described an "angstcultuur" (culture of fear) within the organisation that prevented employees from speaking freely to auditors and investigators.
How errors occur
The Court of Audit identified dozens of ways errors can enter the criminal justice system's databases. Problems begin at the earliest stages of criminal proceedings, when police officers first establish a suspect's identity. A suspect is assigned a unique number that follows them through the entire process, used by the Public Prosecution Service, judges, and the Custodial Institutions Agency.
Errors can arise from simple spelling mistakes during data entry, suspects presenting stolen identity documents, problems with automatic linking between government systems such as the Basic Registration of Persons, or legal name changes that are not properly updated. In many cases, Justid employees manually change names in dossiers when they believe they have spotted an error, acting on their own judgement without clear guidelines.
The police search system uses a key based on the first initial, the first four letters of a surname, and year of birth. When these details match for two different people, mix-ups can occur with devastating consequences.
Photo Credits: Kelly Sikkema/Unsplash
The innocent Irishman
One case cited by De Telegraaf illustrates the human cost of these administrative failures. In August 2022, police in Limburg stopped a black Volkswagen Golf with British plates after the driver ignored a stop signal while speeding. The red-haired British driver was ordered to report to the police station the following day for reckless driving charges.
However, when the case came to court, it was not the British driver who was convicted in absentia, but a red-haired Irishman who regularly visited the Netherlands for work. The innocent man only discovered the verdict against him when police pulled him over during a routine traffic stop and found an outstanding conviction in his name.
Despite loudly proclaiming his innocence, the Irishman was forced to serve a month in prison. The Supreme Court eventually acquitted him, but only after he had already completed the other man's sentence.
A decade of inaction
The Ministry of Justice and Security has been aware of the problem since at least 2012, with the first signals dating back to 2005. Despite repeated requests from Justid for clear guidelines on how to handle such cases, no formal framework has been established.
The Court of Audit described the situation as "very serious" and expressed astonishment that the problem had been allowed to persist for more than a decade despite the ministry being aware of the potential consequences for citizens and society.
A separate investigation by the Audit Service of the State (ADR) found that Justid employees experienced "opposition, exclusion, fear of reprisal, distrust, bullying behaviour and intimidation" when trying to raise concerns. The Ministry of Justice and Security has launched an integrity investigation in response to some of these reports.
Constitutional concerns
The problem raises fundamental questions about the separation of powers. When civil servants change names on verdicts, they potentially step into the role of the judiciary, which the Court of Audit noted "is at odds with the trias politica." Only judges have the legal authority to modify court verdicts, including the names recorded on them.
This has placed Justid employees in what the Court of Audit described as "serious moral distress." Both correcting and failing to correct erroneous verdicts can have severe consequences. If a convicted sex offender's identity is wrongly recorded, that person could theoretically obtain a Certificate of Good Conduct (Verklaring Omtrent het Gedrag) and work in a childcare facility.
Government response
State Secretary for Legal Protection Arno Rutte has acknowledged the seriousness of the situation. The Ministry expects to inform parliament by mid-2026 about the number of name errors in court rulings and how they have been corrected. A formal framework for testing and handling such cases is expected in early 2026.
The ministry states it currently has no indications that innocent citizens are being held in prison, though it cannot say with certainty whether convicted offenders have evaded their sentences due to identity mix-ups.
No funds have been set aside for compensation to affected citizens. The Judicial Information Service says it has not yet received any claims, though legal experts note that liability could exist if Odido demonstrably violated data protection laws.
Citizens who believe they may be affected can request access to their judicial records through the Judicial Information Service at [email protected]. Under Dutch law, every citizen has the right to view their criminal record and request corrections if they believe errors have been made.
