The Dutch Probation Service has been acting contrary to its own complaints regulations for ten years by not publishing the number, nature and outcome of the complaints submitted annually against the organisation.
This is evident from research by NRC following a compensation of 35,000 euros that the probation service paid to a supervised client. The amount was paid after the probation service incorrectly stated several times to the Public Prosecution Service and the judge that the client was not cooperating with his treatment.
The Dutch Probation Service plays an important role in the Dutch criminal justice system and has tens of thousands of clients every year. The organization advises the Public Prosecution Service and the judge on suspects and offenders, supervises and monitors convicts who are under supervision and ensures that community service is carried out. For these activities, the Dutch Probation Service, a foundation, receives about 150 million euros annually from the Ministry of Justice.
The Probation Service in the Netherlands is evident the internal complaints procedure is obliged to publish annually in anonymous form how many and what kind of complaints have been submitted against the organization, as well as the consequences associated with those complaints. The probation service has never done this since 2013, when the complaints procedure was introduced. The probation service also failed to fulfill its commitment to evaluate the functioning of the complaints procedure.
The Dutch Probation Service acknowledges the course of events when asked. NRC requested the complaint figures of recent years, but the probation service could not provide them because “we do not keep a structured record of numbers of internal complaints”. Questions from NRC his reason “to see if this should be done differently”.
Doubling complaints
After an internal complaint to the Probation Service, complainants can turn to the independent Probation Service Complaints Committee. Requested annual reports from the committee, which are not published online because the committee does not have a website, show that the annual number of complaints submitted against the Probation Service doubled in five years to 115 complaints in 2021.
Because the complaints committee also handles complaints for the Salvation Army and SVG Addiction Probation Service – the two other probation service organizations – the total number of complaints came to 149. In the case of only a fraction (17), the Complaints Committee actually issued a decision. This led to 4 partially justified complaints. According to the secretary, these figures do not say everything, because the committee also plays a mediating role and aims to resolve complaints.
In the past, a predecessor of the Justice & Security Inspectorate made critical comments on the complaints procedure of the probation service. When research in 2006 showed that the independent complaints committee ruled in less than ten cases annually, the Inspectorate spoke of an ‘unbelievably small’ number of complaints and called on the probation service and the Ministry of Justice to carry out a follow-up investigation, which never took place.
The Dutch Probation Service has a paid supervisory board, chaired by Mayor Liesbeth Spies (CDA) of Alphen aan den Rijn. When asked why the Board has not found that the probation service is acting in violation of the complaints rules, it states that the Board is informed by the independent complaints committee and that in recent years there has been “no reason” for the supervisory body “to with the way in which the regulations are implemented”.
Read also: How a gardener successfully fought the probation service