Criminal lawyer's forgery charge

Forgery is punishable under Article 225 (1) and (2) of the Dutch Penal Code. These paragraphs read as follows:

"(1) He who falsely makes or falsifies a writing intended to be used as evidence of any fact, with intent to use it as genuine and unadulterated or to cause it to be used by others, shall be punished as guilty of forgery, by imprisonment for a term not exceeding six years or a fine of the fifth category.

2 With the same punishment shall be punished he who intentionally uses the false or forged writing as if it were genuine and unadulterated or intentionally delivers or has at his disposal such writing while he knows or should reasonably suspect that it is intended for such use."

Statutory maximum penalties

The maximum penalty depends on which variant of forgery is proven:

• imprisonment for six years or a fifth category fine for forgery as described in Article 225(1) and (2) of the Criminal Code;

• imprisonment for 7 years or a fifth category fine for forgery of official documents mentioned in Article 226 Sr;

• an 8-year prison term or a fifth-category fine for forgery with the intent to prepare or facilitate a terrostic crime (art. 225 para. 3 Sr.).

In addition, the law describes some variants of forgery with a lower penalty maximum (art. 228-230 Sr). However, case law has revealed that in such cases the Public Prosecution Service may also prosecute for section 225 of the Criminal Code, so that these provisions have lost their relevance in practice (see Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal June 4, 2021, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2021:5774).

LOVS Landmarks

The statutory maximum sentences are rarely imposed. A better indication of the expected sentence follows from the guidelines that various judges have agreed upon among themselves. There are no guidelines specifically for forgery, but there are for fraud. Judges may deviate from these, but they do provide guidance.

In the guidelines for fraud, the penalty to be imposed depends on the extent of the fraud:

• Up to € 10,000.-- 1 week - 2 months GS ov / TS ov

• € 10,000.-- to € 70,000.-- 2-5 months GS ov / TS ov

• € 70,000 to € 125,000 5-9 months GS ov /TS ov + GS vw

• € 125,000.-- to € 250,000.-- 9-12 months GS ov

• €250,000.-- to €500,000.-- 12-18 months GS ov

• €500,000.-- to €1,000,000.-- 18-24 months GS ov

• € 1,000,000 and above 24 months - maximum GS ov

Public Prosecution Service's criminal prosecution guidelines

In addition, the Public Prosecution Service has drawn up guidelines for the way in which it prosecutes forgery. This usually provides a good indication of the expected sentence.

The Public Prosecution Service's criminal prosecution guidelines describe some common forms of forgery, such as possession of a false driver's license (2 months GS for a first offender) or using a false diploma (TS 90-120 hours for a first offender). The guideline itself can be found here .

Additional penalties and measures

If someone is prosecuted for forgery, the stakes can be high. In addition to (prison) sentences, the Public Prosecution Service can also try to confiscate illegally obtained benefits. This is also popularly known as the pluck legislation. The financial stakes can quickly mount up. A conviction for forgery can also have consequences for obtaining a certificate of conduct, especially if the convicted person wants to (continue to) work in the financial services sector.

Under circumstances, a legal entity can also be held criminally responsible for forgery. In a Supreme Court ruling from 2018, for example, a company was convicted of forgery for billing dab as a school. A criminal conduct can be imputed to a legal entity if it can be "reasonably imputed to it. When that is the case, case law further develops.

You can read more about the criminal liability of legal entities at this link .

If a legal entity is criminally liable, then the principals or actual directors can also be criminally prosecuted and convicted. Usually these are members of the board, but they can also be people from lower management. In case about the fish fraud, for example, the director-major shareholder was also held criminally responsible for tampering with the invoices (ECLI:NL:HR:2018:1677).

These forms of liability are, of course, separate from the criminal liability of individual who actually forges or falsely prepares a writing. That person may be considered a perpetrator.