"Intent" Unwritten, But Still Must Be Proven

Although the word "intentionally" or dolus is no longer explicitly stated in every article in Book 2 of the National Criminal Code, this does not mean that a person can be automatically convicted simply for committing an act. The golden principle of Geen Straf Zonder Schuld—no penalty without fault—remains the heart of our law.

The key lies in Article 36 of the National Criminal Code. This article acts as an "anchor" for all criminal acts in Book 2. More crucially, Elucidation of Article 36 Paragraph (2) explicitly affirms that every criminal act in the statutory regulations must be considered to be committed intentionally, and the element of intent must be proven at every stage of the case examination, starting from the investigation to the court. Thus, the malicious intent does not disappear; it only moves to the "parent" general rule to simplify the formulation of the articles below.

To see how this change works in the field, let's dissect the comparison directly:

1. Crime of Murder

  • Old Criminal Code (Article 338): "Whoever deliberately takes the life of another person..."
  • New Criminal Code (Article 458): "Anyone who takes the life of another person..."

2. Offenses of Hostility/Religious Blasphemy

  • Old Criminal Code (Article 156A): "Shall be punished... Whoever deliberately in public expresses feelings or commits acts that in essence of a hostile nature..."
  • New Criminal Code (Article 300): "Any person in public who commits an act of a hostile nature..."

Visually, the new formulation appears much more concise. However, this simplicity is deceptive. Although the phrase "intentionally" has been removed from the text of Article 458 or Article 300, the prosecutor's burden of proof is not reduced in the slightest. They must still prove that the perpetrator did indeed have malicious intent to take a life or commit hostility, referring to the general provisions in Book 1.