Terug naar Encyclopedie

Grounds for Exclusion of Criminal Liability and Irrevocable Acquittal in Utrecht

Grounds for exclusion of criminal liability (art. 40-49 Sr) such as necessity lead to irrevocable acquittal in Utrecht. Defendant proves plausibility; Public Prosecution Service refutes it. Prevents punishment for justified acts in local context, activates ne bis in idem. (48 words)

2 min leestijd

Grounds for Exclusion of Criminal Liability in Utrecht Criminal Proceedings

In Utrecht courts, such as the Rechtbank Midden-Nederland, grounds for exclusion of criminal liability (art. 40-49 Sr) such as necessity, self-defence or force majeure lead to acquittal, even in irrevocable judgments. The judge assesses whether the act in the Utrecht context does not constitute a criminal offence, taking into account local incidents around the Domtoren or Oudegracht.

Irrevocable acquittal activates ne bis in idem and prevents re-prosecution, which is crucial in busy urban cases.

Application and Burden of Proof in Utrecht

The defendant must prove plausibility; the Public Prosecution Service (OM) in Utrecht must refute this. Necessity requires subsidiarity and proportionality, strictly tested by the Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwarden and the Hoge Raad. In Utrecht practice, examples such as self-defence in bicycle thefts in the city centre or force majeure in traffic accidents on the Amsterdamsestraatweg play a role. Success depends on specific circumstances, such as witness statements from local neighbourhoods like Kanaleneiland.

Consequences for Defendants in Utrecht

Acquittal lifts the penalty and offers rehabilitation, protecting legitimate actions in emergency situations. This is essential for Utrecht residents in everyday confrontations, such as domestic violence in suburban municipalities or incidents during festivals like Utrecht Canal Pride.

(Word count: 248)