THE HAGUE – The Kingdom of the Netherlands is preparing a completely new Kingdom Extradition Act for Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten, replacing extradition rules that are still largely based on the colonial-era Curaçaosch Uitleveringsbesluit of 1926.
The draft legislation and explanatory documents have now been submitted to the Dutch Parliament as well as the parliaments of Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten.
According to the explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposal, the new Kingdom law became necessary after amendments to the Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands entered into force on January 1, 2024.
Since then, independent Kingdom decrees may only exist temporarily, meaning that Kingdom matters such as extradition must eventually be formally regulated through a Kingdom Act approved by all participating countries.
The Dutch government emphasized that the day-to-day extradition system will largely remain unchanged. Existing procedures from the current extradition decree are being transferred “as much as possible without substantive changes.”
However, several sections have been modernized, clarified, and updated to reflect recent rulings by the Dutch Supreme Court.
One of the major changes is the explicit inclusion of several human rights protections within the law.
Under the proposed legislation, extradition will be prohibited if there is a risk of discriminatory prosecution based on religion, political beliefs, race, or nationality.
The law also allows extradition requests to be denied based on factors such as age, health conditions, or exceptional hardship.
The legislation further formally incorporates the “ne bis in idem” principle, meaning individuals cannot be extradited again for offenses on which a final judgment has already been issued.
Additional protections are included for convictions rendered in absentia. Extradition to enforce a sentence would only be allowed if the suspect had sufficient opportunity — or will still receive an opportunity — to defend themselves properly.
The new law also more clearly defines the roles of institutions involved in extradition proceedings.
The Joint Court of Justice will remain responsible for judicial review of whether extradition is legally admissible, while the Governor will ultimately decide whether extradition is approved or denied.