Attributed attorney now receives a dismissal on appeal after tampering with exam questions
JL (Left) on 6 February, when he was found guilty of two disciplinary breaks by the Dutch -speaking disciplinary court. – © RR
The attented attorney JL and public prosecutor AV still receive their resignation on appeal. The Dutch -speaking disciplinary court decided that after their role in the tampering at the magistrate exam last year. The disciplinary bank reports this in a press release.
The Dutch -speaking disciplinary bank has decided on appeal that the Department Procurer JL and the public prosecutor AV will nevertheless receive their resignation after a number of incidents during the comparative admission exam to the judicial internship.
On March 3, 2024, the Supreme Court for the Justice (HRJ) announced that fraud had been discovered during that exam. CB, a member of the appointment and regard to the HRJ, turned out to have transferred information about the exam to certain participants. The results of the comparative exam were declared void. CB had delivered the information to Department Procurer JL and to Parketjurist AV The daughter of JL would participate in the exam.
After leaking these facts, JL received a suspension on March 19, 2024. This suspension was extended to this day.
On February 6, 2025, JL was found guilty of two disciplinary crimes by the Dutch-speaking disciplinary court: delivering prior knowledge to his daughter (which could disadvantage other candidates) and not reporting a violation of professional secrecy by Advocate-General CB
Parketjurist AV was convicted by the disciplinary court on February 20, 2025 for two disciplinary crimes: consciously participating with prior knowledge in the comparative exam and not reporting a violation of professional secrecy. As a disciplinary sentence, AV was suspended for a period of 12 months for this.
Profession
On 5 March 2025, the public prosecutor of West Flanders appealed against the judgments in the disciplinary proceedings against JL and AV also appealed against the judgment of the disciplinary court because she could not agree with the rule of the court. However, she did not dispute the disciplinary infringements themselves, neither in the first instance nor on appeal.
The Disciplinary Bank has now ruled on appeal that the disciplinary surcharges have indeed been proven. Both are therefore imposed the same disciplinary sentence, namely the effective, unconditional dismissal of the official. The disciplinary bank on appeal finds this a proportional, appropriate and appropriate punishment, they let them know in a press release. « With their behavior, they detracted from the dignity of their office and consequently to the proper functioning of the judiciary, » it still sounds.
:format(webp)/s3/static.nrc.nl/images/gn4/stripped/data133764029-68dc7d.jpg "Authors and publishers are angry about owner KKR due to ties with Israel. ‘We have been complicated’")
