Reportage

Holland – the country famous for tulips and clogs, dykes and windmills and tangible tolerance in society, is one of the most densely populated countries and of the lowest altitude in the world. In fact, the name Holland is inaccurate because historically and geographically it refers only to the region nowadays comprising the two provinces of North and South Holland. Actually, the Kingdom of the Netherlands comprises also the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba.

The Netherlands is a constitutional monarchy. Its official capital is Amsterdam, the city that anyone who has visited thinks he knows it but each time he discovers something new. Founded in the 13th century, it bears the name of the Amstel river, on which it is built. The beauty of the canals and the little restaurants perched around them, the hordes of cyclists, the picturesque buildings and magnificent museums attract many tourists and make Amsterdam a vibrant city of its own irresistible charm.

The Hague is the administrative capital of Holland, where the seat of the government, the Queen’s residence and most embassies are located. Also, the International Court accommodated in the Palace of Peace, the International Criminal Court, Europol and the Hague Academy of International Law.

Apart from this popular information, it is a little known fact that Holland is the country with the best developed and most efficient judicial system in Europe. It is no accident that the reform of the Bulgarian judiciary is based namely on the Dutch model. In 2003 the US Agency for International Development (USAID) started a Commercial Law Reform Project (CLRP) as part of the agency’s efforts to improve the Bulgarian business environment. Under this project, three years ago a group of representatives of different parliamentary forces visited Holland and got acquainted with the successful practices and experience of the country in the field of the judiciary. At that time in Bulgaria there were only government executive magistrates, and the accumulated uncollected receipts exceeded 1,700 million levs.

The MPs acquainted with the Dutch experience were among the initiators of passing a law for the introduction of private enforcement in Bulgaria. And despite the encountered difficulties, in May 2005 the law was adopted. In about 8 months, the private bailiffs reported more than 37,000 initiated proceedings to the total worth of 340 million levs, of which 90 million were already collected.

After the adoption of the law and the structuring of the Chamber of Private Enforcement Agents (CPEA) and its committees, two main challenges remained – the building up of an efficient system of control and the adoption of ethical rules and quality standards for the profession. Things that in Holland can be seen in practice. In order to acquaint the representatives of CPEA and the Ministry of Justice with the organization, methods and practice of the Dutch Financial Supervision Bureau, the information system for processing and analysis of the financial statements of the bailiffs in Holland, and to study the quality standards of the provided services, developed by the Royal Professional Association of Judicial Officers in The Netherlands (KBvG), the USAID World Learning program with the support of the CLRP organized a training visit to Holland.

Private enforcement in Holland has over 100-year-long history. The judicial officer is an entrepreneur charged with official duties such as subpoenaing, eviction, distraint and enforcement of court judgements, assigned to him by the force of law. In their execution the judicial officer acts as a public servant, independently and impartially. Apart from these official duties, he performs other activities related to extrajudicial collection of debts and legal advising.

At present in Holland there are 392 judicial officers and 455 assistant judicial officers, who can operate nationwide.

The profession is regulated by the Judicial Officers Act, which became effective on July 15, 2001. The judicial officers join the public-legal professional organization – the Royal Professional Association of Judicial Officers in The Netherlands – and are subordinate to its obligatory rules. The organization is governed by a 9-member board, 30-seat council of members, 6 representatives of each of the 5 districts of Holland, and a general assembly, which elects the council, which in turn appoints and controls the board members.

The main task of the Royal Professional Association of Judicial Officers is the fostering of good practices in the profession and improvement of the professional skills of its members.

In case of breach of the ethical and professional norms, the punishments are imposed by a Disciplinary Court. Sanctions vary from fines, through suspension to revocation of the license to practice the profession. The Royal Association, the Financial Supervision Bureau, as well as the parties in the proceedings can appeal to the Disciplinary Court.

The seat of the Royal Professional Association of Judicial Officers in The Netherlands is in Baarn. The representatives of the Bulgarian Chamber and the Ministry of Justice were received by the president of the board, who, despite his numerous engagements, kindly spared some time to talk with our crew.

Frans van der Meer, President of the Board of the Royal Professional Association of Judicial Officers in The Netherlands:
The profession of judicial officer has a very long tradition in Holland. Before the adoption of the 2001 act, our activity was controlled by the professional organization itself, not by the government. It was regulated by a decree, which is not sufficient however to govern the overall activity of judicial officers. As you know, our job starts where people have problems, mainly financial. Our important role is to advise people in such situations. Backed by authority of the government, we more easily enforce the execution of the respective sanction. The association’s activity consists in following the work of the judicial officers and this is a very important function.

Mr. Van der Meer, on our program we have visits to a small, medium and large office of judicial officers. By what criteria do you divide them – the number of people employed in them or the turnover?
The criterion is the activity of the judicial officer. If I want to make my work easier, I will have to employ more people, but more people means more problems. I think some judicial officers prefer to have smaller specialized offices. Others rely on automation and new technologies, which are quite expensive however, as well as on specialization regarding the activity. Ever more often you find partnerships of two or more judicial officers.

You said the professional organization controls the activity of the judicial officers. How many violations did you have in the past year and what do you undertake in this respect?
We did have several instances of misconduct and misuse of personal information.

In the event of established breaches, I get in touch with the financial control inspectors and they undertake measures for checking up the accountancy documentation and the financial activity of the private judicial officer.

The Financial Supervision Bureau comprises only accountants. Their basic function is to control the financial activity and the organization of the judicial officers’ offices. They follow closely the special account of the private judicial officer, where the collected debts are accumulated.

The reform of the judicial enforcement in Bulgaria began on the model of the Dutch. What is your recommendation to the Bulgarian enforcement agents, who are now starting in this business?
An essential part of the activity of judicial officers is to advise both the creditor and the debtor on their course of action in a particular situation. It is extremely important to act humanely and to defend the interests of the people.

Each member of the board of the Royal Association has a portfolio of issues for which he is responsible: international relations, internal relations, professional skills, issues related to the offices of the judicial officers, finances, general matters.

Jos Uitdehaag, a member of the board of the Royal Professional Association of Judicial Officers in The Netherlands:
I am a private judicial officer in Holland. I am in charge of three offices with a total of 65 employees. In addition, I deal with the international issues at the national organization. Besides, I work as questor at the Scientific Committee of the International Union of Judicial Officers, based in Paris.

My first visit to Bulgaria was in 2001. In 2003-04 our contacts with Bulgaria continued with the working visit of a group of Bulgarian MPs, led by Valery Dimitrov. The aim of the two-week visit to Holland and Poland was for them to compare the systems of judicial enforcement in the two countries. The Dutch one has an old tradition, whereas in Poland judicial enforcement was transferred from state to private only recently.

I was an advisor in the drafting of the bill on the work of private judicial officers in Bulgaria and during its discussion in parliament. I participated also in the process of applying the law in practice. We thank you for the trust which Bulgaria put in us by building its private judicial enforcement system largely on the Dutch model. My observations of the application of the law in your country show that Bulgaria has achieved a lot within a short period of time. For comparison, the last amendment of the law in Holland took us 25 years.

How many times have you been in Bulgaria? You worked for the reform throughout?
I visited Bulgaria 14 times. Until now I have been quite engaged with you and the fact that I was working with a strongly motivated team, who want to implement the changes, made my work very pleasant. I was impressed also by the fact that in Bulgaria it is possible to react quickly in different situations and, unlike in Holland, meetings at the Ministry of Justice could be arranged at short notice. Therefore my visits to Bulgaria were very efficient.

Is this to say that you evaluate highly the work on the private judicial enforcement law, and what lies ahead?
These are only first steps, although the transition of the judicial enforcement system from state to state/private is in itself a major step. Now the occupation of judicial officer is combined with that of entrepreneur. His remuneration wholly depends on his own efforts and the clients’ satisfaction with the services provided. At the same time, the status of entrepreneur brings forth the need to control the activity of the private judicial officer. It is very important to have in place a good mechanism of financial and disciplinary control. This mechanism will guarantee you the trust of the people and business organizations in Bulgaria.