More than a year after Jari’s death, the pain that Ton (64) feels every day is still close to the surface. The thought of the blow releases the emotions again. The Golf-R that killed his son in Apeldoorn went so fast that Jari flew 45 meters through the air. “Half a football field,” Tom says, audibly affected. In court it was established that driver Dylan B. was going at least 136 km/h at the time of contact. The maximum speed locally: 50 km/hour.
Could Jari’s death have been prevented? In any case, the tragedy announced itself in Dylan B’s driving behavior. He received 55 traffic fines in less than four years prior to the accident. Three of them in the same street where he would later kill Jari. The same year, Abdelghafour el B. shot Esmee (19) and Ilse (18) in Alblasserdam, with fatal consequences. He received 52 fines in the same period. “He should have been off the road a long time ago,” says Esmee’s father.
For a long time it was unclear exactly how large this group of roadkill is. The Central Judicial Collection Agency refused to release these figures. But after an appeal to the Open Government Act by BNR, the CJIB changed tack last month. In 2023, there were more than 31,000 road users who, like Dylan B., received more than 10 traffic fines in a year. This concerns so-called ‘Mulder Act’ fines for less serious offences, almost three quarters of which concern speeding offences. The number of serious recidivists has been fairly stable over the last three years.
The risk of an accident is the same as driving drunk
Compared to the almost twelve million driving license holders in the Netherlands, it is a tiny group, but a life-threatening one. The Institute for Scientific Research on Road Safety (SWOV) already conducted research into the relationship between fines and accidents in 2011. The predictive value appears to be enormous. The worst repeat offenders that SWOV investigated (11 fines in four years) do not come close to Dylan B. Yet they are more than forty times more likely to be involved in an accident. The equivalent of driving with about ten glasses of beer, says researcher Sander Kint. ‘And the chance of an accident increases exponentially the more fines you receive.’
The danger that this group represents is also recognized in the law abroad. In Germany, eight speeding fines in one year already result in a driving ban. Australia has a similar system in which thirteen fines over the course of three years always lead to a temporary suspension of the driver’s license. Although the Netherlands has a points driving license for novice drivers, the effects are marginal. In recent years, the number of driving licenses confiscated under this scheme has never exceeded 100, according to inquiries with the CBR. Furthermore, there is only a points system for alcohol consumption.
‘We are not in the right mind to allow this’
“In the Netherlands you can simply drive fifty times too fast and spend fifty times,” says Rosa Jansen, chairman of the Board of Directors of Victim Support Netherlands. ‘We’re actually not in the right mind to allow that.’ Victim support assists around 38,000 people every year after a traffic accident. According to Jansen, traffic offenders are often involved in the worst cases, ‘where someone dies or is seriously injured’. It then becomes clear in court that someone was already in the eyes of the authorities. The group should be dealt with much harder, Jansen believes. ‘You have a murder weapon in your hands in a car, which requires associated responsibility.’
There have also been calls in the House of Representatives for some time to take tougher action against repeated fines. Chris Stoffer (SGP) is one of the advocates for a stricter approach to repeat offenders. In January he raised the issue – not for the first time – in a debate, then following the fatal accident in Alblasserdam.
Minister Yeşilgöz: revoking a driver’s license after fifty fines is not possible
However, Minister responsible for Justice and Security Dilan Yeşilgöz said in Parliament that there is little he can do against road pirates as long as they remain outside the criminal law. Those who only commit minor traffic violations fall under the ‘Mulder Act’, introduced in 1989 to relieve the Public Prosecution Service. Driving through red lights, speeding violations under 40 kilometers per hour, using a mobile phone while driving can all be dealt with by a fine from the CJIB without the intervention of a judge. The law also stipulates that the owner of a car must pay fines regardless of who was behind the wheel, so-called license plate liability.
“If we want to attach more serious consequences to repeated minor traffic violations, the system must be changed,” a ministry spokesperson said. Dealing with repeat offenders is not possible on the basis of license plate liability – the Public Prosecution Service would then have to prove who was behind the wheel, which would put further pressure on the already overburdened criminal chain.
The ministry is not keen to (temporarily) revoke driving licenses outside the scope of criminal law, as is happening in Australia and Germany, as the measure is too severe. The judge must look at such a measure ‘in view of the often major consequences of a driving ban for the person concerned’. An earlier attempt to introduce a progressive system, in which fines increase for successive violations, failed at the end of 2018 due to the same arguments.
Victim Support Netherlands: ‘then adjust the Mulder Act’
Jansen from Victim Support believes that the minister hides too easily behind the Mulder Act. According to Jansen, himself a former judge, the judiciary has not yet exhausted the options for tackling traffic offenders. The Public Prosecution Service must be more creative in prosecuting such repeat offenders. “But if it is not possible within the law, let us change the law very quickly,” says Jansen.
Chris Stoffer also calls the minister’s arguments ‘not strong’. The group of extreme repeat offenders is so small that it can also be tackled manually, says the SGP leader. “There are a number of ticking time bombs.” Stoffer, himself also in favor of a progressive fine system, points out that SWOV calculated in 2017 that its introduction would save about thirty lives every year. Stoffer also wants to amend the Mulder Act if necessary. ‘That’s what the House of Representatives is for.’
The Ministry of Justice and Security has announced that an evaluation of the law is underway. The traffic jam problem is included in this, a spokesperson said.
In any case, it no longer makes any difference to Jari. According to his father, the traffic police in Apeldoorn knew that Dylan would sooner or later make victims. “It wasn’t a question of if, but when,” he says. Esmee’s father is even more certain: if action had been taken earlier, his daughter would still have lived. “For us, this cannot be reversed, but I think you should do something about this,” he says. ‘The law really needs to change.’
