Title: wetten.nl - Regeling - Standards DNA analysis and interpretation- Source level (001.1) - BWBR0039078

Source: https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0039078/

Content:
{"title": "wetten.nl - Regeling - Standards DNA analysis and interpretation- Source level (001.1) - BWBR0039078", "content": "Standards DNA analysis and interpretation- Source level (001.1)\n\nReporting forensic experts play a crucial role in the administration of justice. The\n                                          NRGD aims to ensure justified confidence in forensic expertise for stakeholders. This\n                                          confidence must be based on the demonstrable independently safeguarded quality of\n                                          forensic investigators and their reports on the basis of (inter)national forensic-specific\n                                          standards.\n\nThe NRGD is managed by the Board of Court Experts (hereinafter: Board). The Board\u2019s\n                                          core task is to rule on the applications for registration or repeat registration in\n                                          the register of the NRGD (register). To that end the Board first defines the field\n                                          of expertise. This is important in order to inform applicants, assessors and users\n                                          of the register (e.g. judge, public prosecutor and attorney) about the activities\n                                          an expert in the field of expertise in question engages in and about the activities\n                                          that fall outside the field of expertise. The demarcation of the field of expertise\n                                          is set out in Part II of these Standards.\n\nThe Board also determines the criteria on the basis of which an assessment is made\n                                          for each field of expertise as to whether an application complies with the quality\n                                          requirements. The generic requirements are set out in the Register of Court Experts\n                                          in Criminal Cases Decree (Besluit register deskundige in strafzaken). These requirements are elaborated further for each field of expertise. This elaboration\n                                          is set out in Part III of these Standards.\n\nFurthermore the Board determines the assessment procedure. This procedure is described\n                                          in Part IV of these Standards.\n\nThe NRGD has a system of periodic repeat registration. Court experts must demonstrate\n                                          every five years that they still meet the requirements in force at that time. The\n                                          Standards are dynamic and are being developed further in order to enhance the quality\n                                          of the experts. These Standards set out the current state of the (sub-)field of expertise.\n\nThe NRGD distinguishes two types of applicants: the initial applicant and the repeat\n                                          applicant. The initial applicant is a reporter who at the time of submission of the\n                                          application is not yet registered in the register for the field of expertise to which\n                                          the application relates. The repeat applicant is an expert who is already registered\n                                          in the register for the field of expertise to which the application relates.\n\nThese two types of applicants are subdivided as follows:\n\nInitial applicant:\n\n(i) independent reporter: a reporter who has independently written and signed the required\n                                                number of case reports;\n\n(ii) reporter without work of his own: a reporter who has not independently written and\n                                                signed the number of case reports required for registration.\n\nIf the assessment is favourable, the reporter without work of his own will only qualify\n                                                for temporary registration.\n\nRepeat applicant:\n\n(i)  Repeat applicant after unconditional registration (before: full registration);\n\n(ii) Repeat applicant after conditional registration (before: temporary registration).\n\nThe initial applicant is an applicant who at the time of submission of the application\n                                          does not have an NRGD registration. An initial applicant could be:\n\n\u2013 the independently reporting expert;\n\n\u2013 the newly-trained expert;\n\n\u2013 the applicant whose earlier application has been rejected by the Board;\n\n\u2013 the applicant whose registration was previously stricken.\n\nIn respect of initial applicants, it is necessary to make a clear distinction between\n                                          the independent reporter and the reporter without work of his own. An example of a\n                                          reporter without work of his own is the newly-trained expert. This expert has completed\n                                          the forensic training (reporter\u2019s training), but has not yet been able to independently\n                                          write the number of reports required for the assessment because these are written\n                                          under the supervision of a tutor during the training. Another example of a reporter\n                                          without work of his own is the reporter whose earlier application was rejected and\n                                          who has been working (partly) under supervision following this rejection.\n\nThe Board adopts the following principle. Every applicant must draw up a List of Case\n                                          Information. This list must include a specific number of cases in a period specified\n                                          by the Board immediately preceding the application. If the List of Case Information\n                                          includes one or more cases which have been prepared under supervision, the applicant\n                                          will be qualified as a \u2018reporter without work of his own\u2019. An additional requirement\n                                          applies to the applicant who was rejected earlier: the case reports included in the\n                                          List of Case Information must have been drawn up after the date of the Board\u2019s decision\n                                          rejecting the earlier application (Policy Framework on Application after Rejection)1\n\nThe distinction between the various types of repeat applicants is important in the\n                                          context of the assessment procedure: the documents a repeat applicant must submit,\n                                          the composition of the Advisory Committee on Assessment and the assessment method.\n\nThese Standards have been established by the Board in accordance with the Register\n                                          of Court Experts in Criminal Cases Decree (Besluit register deskundige in strafzaken) and the Experts in Criminal Cases Act (Wet deskundige in strafzaken). Representatives from the various domains were consulted; users (judges, public\n                                          prosecutors and lawyers) and subject matter experts in the field (professional organisations,\n                                          representative associations, experts both at home and abroad). The draft of the Standards\n                                          has also been published on the NRGD website for public consultation.\n\nThe Standards are valid from the date shown on the cover. The validity runs until\n                                          the moment of publication of a new version. In principle it will be checked annually\n                                          as being up-to-date. This check can lead to a new version. The aim is to publish the\n                                          new version no more than once a year.\n\nAll changes made to the Standards lead to a new version. Newer versions of (parts\n                                          of) the Standards are designated with a higher version number.\n\nIn the case of editorial changes the old version number is increased by 0.1. Editorial\n                                             changes have no substantive impact. In the case of substantive changes the version\n                                             number is increased by 1.\n\nThe revision history starts with version 1.0 as the first formally approved version.\n                                             Substantive changes made are briefly described in the revision history (Annex C). This makes it possible to trace which Standards are valid at any given moment at\n                                             all times.\n\nWithin the field of DNA analysis and interpretation \u2013 Source level (hereinafter: DNA\n                                          \u2013 Source level), the following questions are relevant:\n\n1. \nAre biological traces present on the exhibit and what is the nature of the cellular\n                                                   material in the biological trace?\n\nIs it a classical biological trace, such as blood, semen, saliva or hair (source level),\n                                                or is it cellular material (sub source level), the nature of which cannot yet be identified\n                                                using current techniques, as is the case with biological contact traces (skin cells)?\n\nAnswering this question requires knowledge and experience of presumptive testing.\n                                                It concerns identification and classification.\n\n2. \nFrom whom does the biological trace originate i.e. who is the donor of the cellular\n                                                   material?\n\nThis question concerns individualisation. Answering this question requires knowledge\n                                                of and experience with DNA profiling and statistical evaluation, including knowledge\n                                                of the legal status and working procedures concerning national DNA databases for criminal\n                                                cases, among which, criteria for inclusion and removal of DNA profiles, criteria for\n                                                matching, and inclusion of and comparison with partial DNA profiles and mixed DNA-\n                                                profiles.\n\n3. \nHow was the biological material deposited?\n\nIs there a relationship between the trace and the criminal activity; and, are there\n                                                (alternative) explanations as to how the trace came to be at the given location?\n\nThis question concerns association and reconstruction. Answering this question requires\n                                                knowledge of issues of transfer and persistence.\n\nStated below is the description of the field of expertise DNA- Source level.\n\nIn a criminal law context, experts working in the field of DNA \u2013 Source level, primarily\n                                          seek to answer question 2: From whom does the biological trace originate? In other words, who is the donor of\n                                             the cellular material?\n\nThe DNA \u2013 Source level expert subjects the biological trace material to (Autosomal\n                                          and/or Y-chromosomal) DNA analysis, and may subsequently perform DNA profile comparison.\n                                          To do this, the expert compares DNA profiles from trace material with each other and/or\n                                          with DNA profiles from reference samples.\n\nIn addition, comparisons may be made with DNA profiles in DNA databases.\n\nThe DNA \u2013 Source level expert is concerned with interpreting and comparing individual\n                                          and complex and/or mixed DNA profiles obtained from the trace material under standard\n                                          conditions or with the help of low template/minimal traces DNA techniques. The expert\u2019s\n                                          focus is on the whole scope of biological traces, including contact traces.\n\nThe tasks that fall within the field of DNA \u2013 Source level are:\n\n\u2013 detection and identification of bodily fluids by means of visual examination and presumptive\n                                                biochemical test methods, followed up by confirmation of the search result by means\n                                                of microscopy and immunoassay;\n\n\u2013 autosomal DNA analysis and interpretation;\n\n\u2013 low template/minimal traces DNA analysis and interpretation;\n\n\u2013 statistical calculations to determine the evidential value of a match.\n\nExperts within the field of DNA \u2013 Source level are capable of applying Autosomal and\n                                          Low Template/Minimal Traces DNA analysis techniques and are capable of interpreting,\n                                          statistically evaluating and reporting on the results of these techniques.\n\nExperts within the field of DNA \u2013 Source level are capable of applying DNA techniques\n                                          used to answer question 1. \u2018Are biological materials present on the exhibit and what is the nature of the cellular\n                                             material in the biological trace?\u2019 even though not all DNA experts perform these analyses (anymore) themselves.\n\nExperts within the field of DNA \u2013 Source level do not have to be able to answer question\n                                          3. \u2018How was the biological material deposited?\u2019. Being able to answer this question adequately is central to reporting at Activity\n                                          level and requires specialised knowledge and expertise (See paragraph 2.2).\n\nWithin the practice of DNA \u2013 Source level, five specific types of questions exist\n                                          that require additional expertise and experience, and therefore, fall outside the\n                                          scope of DNA \u2013 Source level as registered by the NRGD:\n\n\u2013 \nY-chromosomal DNA Testing\n\n\u2013 Specific question: Subject biological trace material to Y chromosomal (Y-STR) DNA\n                                                Testing and then carry out comparative Y chromosomal DNA analysis including interpretation.\n\n\u2013 \nKinship DNA Testing\n\n\u2013 Specific question: Investigate a (presumed) biological relationship based on DNA profiles\n                                                of individuals and/or traces.\n\n\u2013 \nExternally Visible Characteristics\n\n\u2013 Specific question: Determine the geographical origin and/or externally visible characteristics\n                                                of the unknown cell donor (the possible perpetrator of the crime) by means of DNA\n                                                analysis of the trace evidence.\n\n\u2013 Mitochondrial DNA Testing\n\n\u2013 Specific question: Subject biological trace material to Mitochondrial DNA Testing\n                                                and then carry out comparative Mitochondrial DNA Testing.\n\n\u2013 \nReporting at Activity level\n\n\u2013 Specific question: How was the biological material deposited? (see above)\n\nWhen reporting as an expert registered for the field of DNA-Source level, the expert\n                                          should be aware of the possibilities and limitations of the above mentioned techniques\n                                          and/or specialisations, and in addition, the expert should be aware of the potential\n                                          for international searches of intelligence databases and of new developments such\n                                          as RNA, SNPs and Next Generation Sequencing. The expert should also be aware of the\n                                          pros and cons of these techniques, specialisations and/or developments.\n\nThe register will record the name of the relevant expert as an expert in the field\n                                          of DNA- Source level.\n\nThe general (repeat) registration requirements are given in the next paragraphs in\n                                       italics with a reference to Article 12 paragraph 2 in the Register of Court Experts\n                                       in Criminal Cases Decree (Besluit register deskundige in strafzaken).\n\nAn expert will only be registered as an expert in criminal cases upon submission of\n                                       the application if, in the opinion of the Board, the expert:\n\na. has sufficient knowledge and experience in the field of expertise to which the application\n                                             relates;\n\nb. has sufficient knowledge of and experience in the field of law concerned, and is sufficiently\n                                             familiar with the position and the role of the expert in this field;\n\nc. is able to inform the commissioning party whether, and if so, to what extent the commissioning\n                                             party\u2019s question at issue is sufficiently clear and capable of investigation in order\n                                             to be able to answer it on the basis of their specific expertise;\n\nd. is able, on the basis of the question at issue, to prepare and carry out an investigation\n                                             plan in accordance with the applicable standards;\n\ne. is able to collect, document, interpret and assess investigative materials and data\n                                             in a forensic context in accordance with the applicable standards;\n\nf. is able to apply the current investigative methods in a forensic context in accordance\n                                             with the applicable standards\n\ng. is able to give a verifiable and well-reasoned case report on the assignment and any\n                                             other relevant aspects of their expertise in terms which are comprehensible to the\n                                             commissioning party, both orally and in writing;\n\nh. is able to complete an assignment within the stipulated or agreed period.\n\ni. is able to carry out the activities as an expert independently, impartially, conscientiously,\n                                             competently, and in a trustworthy manner.\n\n(...) has sufficient knowledge and experience in the field of expertise to which the\n                                             application relates.\n\nBasic requirements:\n\n\u2013 work at the level of someone who has completed an academic Master\u2019s Degree, and\n                                                            must have a proven level of education, training and expertise;\n\n\u2013 be familiar with the summary of concepts (see annex A) and keep abreast of state-of-the-art developments;\n\n\u2013 minimally be able to answer questions about Autosomal DNA Testing and Low Template/Minimal\n                                                            Traces DNA Testing;\n\n\u2013 have sufficient knowledge of the pros and cons of various techniques, specialisations and scientific methods used in the field,\n                                                            be aware and capable of explaining the possibilities and limitations of these techniques,\n                                                            specialisations and methods, and keep abreast of related recent developments;\n\n\u2013 be currently engaged in interpreting and reporting on cases at the time of the application\n                                                            for registration.\n\nSpecific requirements:\n\n\u2013 have interpreted and reported on at least 50 complex and/or mixed DNA profiles in\n                                                            the past 2 years that have been subjected to collegial review;\n\nIn case the applicant is also acting as a supervisor, at least 10 complex and/or mixed DNA profiles on the List of Case Information should be independently interpreted and reported on.\n\n\u2013 have spent an average of 40 hours a year over the past 5 years on forensically relevant\n                                                            professional development (e.g. publications, attending conferences, running or attending\n                                                            courses).\n\nBasic requirements:\n\n\u2013 work at the level of someone who has completed an academic Master\u2019s Degree, and\n                                                            must have a proven level of education, training and expertise;\n\n\u2013 be familiar with the summary of concepts (see annex A) and keep abreast of state-of-the-art developments;\n\n\u2013 should minimally be able to answer questions about Autosomal DNA Testing and Low\n                                                            Template/Minimal Traces DNA Testing;\n\n\u2013 have sufficient knowledge of the pros and cons of various techniques, specialisations and scientific methods used in the field,\n                                                            be aware and capable of explaining the possibilities and limitations of these techniques,\n                                                            specialisations and methods, and keep abreast of related recent developments;\n\n\u2013 be currently engaged in interpreting and reporting on cases at the time of the application\n                                                            for registration.\n\nSpecific requirements:\n\n\u2013 have interpreted and reported on at least 50 complex and/or mixed DNA profiles in\n                                                            the past 2 years that have been subjected to collegial review and/or supervision,\n                                                            and of which at least one complex and/or mixed DNA profile has been drawn up under\n                                                            supervision;\n\n\u2013 have spent an average of 40 hours a year over the past 2 years on forensically relevant\n                                                            professional development (e.g. publications, attending conferences, running or attending\n                                                            courses).\n\nBasic requirements:\n\n\u2013 work at the level of someone who has completed an academic Master\u2019s Degree, and\n                                                            must have a proven level of education, training and expertise;\n\n\u2013 be familiar with the summary of concepts (see annex A) and keep abreast of state-of-the-art developments;\n\n\u2013 minimally be able to answer questions about Autosomal DNA Testing and Low Template/Minimal\n                                                            Traces DNA Testing;\n\n\u2013 have sufficient knowledge of the pros and cons of various techniques, specialisations and scientific methods used in the field,\n                                                            be aware and capable of explaining the possibilities and limitations of these techniques,\n                                                            specialisations and methods, and keep abreast of related recent developments;\n\n\u2013 be currently engaged in interpreting and reporting on cases at the time of the application\n                                                            for registration.\n\nSpecific requirements:\n\n\u2013 have interpreted and reported on at least 60 complex and/or mixed DNA profiles in\n                                                            the past 5 years that have been subjected to collegial review;\n\nIn case the applicant is also acting as a supervisor, at least 10 complex and/or mixed DNA profiles on the List of Case Information should be independently interpreted and reported on.\n\n\u2013 have spent an average of 40 hours a year over the past 5 years on forensically relevant\n                                                            professional development (e.g. publications, attending conferences, running or attending\n                                                            courses).\n\nBasic requirements:\n\n\u2013 work at the level of someone who has completed an academic Master\u2019s Degree, and\n                                                            must have a proven level of education, training and expertise;\n\n\u2013 be familiar with the summary of concepts (see annex A) and keep abreast of state-of-the-art developments;\n\n\u2013 minimally be able to answer questions about Autosomal DNA Testing and Low Template/Minimal\n                                                            Traces DNA Testing;\n\n\u2013 have sufficient knowledge of the pros and cons of various techniques, specialisations and scientific methods used in the field,\n                                                            be aware and capable of explaining the possibilities and limitations of these techniques,\n                                                            specialisations and methods, and keep abreast of related recent developments;\n\n\u2013 be currently engaged in interpreting and reporting on cases at the time of the application\n                                                            for registration.\n\nSpecific requirements:\n\n\u2013 demonstrably have interpreted and reported an average of 25 complex and/or mixed\n                                                            DNA profiles a year during the registration period that have been subjected to collegial\n                                                            review;\n\nIn case the applicant is also acting as a supervisor, at least 10 complex and/or mixed DNA profiles on the List of Case Information should be independently interpreted and reported on.\n\n\u2013 have spent an average of 40 hours a year during the registration period on forensically\n                                                            relevant professional development (e.g. publications, attending conferences, running\n                                                            or attending courses).\n\n(...) has sufficient knowledge of and experience in the field of law concerned, and\n                                             is sufficiently familiar with the position and the role of the expert in this field.\n\n\u2013 In general an applicant should have adequate knowledge of Dutch criminal law:\n\n\u2022 context of criminal law:\n\n\u25cb Trias Politica, distinction between civil law, administrative law and criminal law.\n\n\u2022 criminal law procedure:\n\n\u25cb pre-trial investigation;\n\n\u25cb coercive measures;\n\n\u25cb stages of the proceedings;\n\n\u25cb actors in the criminal justice system (tasks/powers/responsibilities);\n\n\u25cb regulations concerning experts laid down in the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure (position\n                                                            and powers of commissioning party, legal position of expert, position and powers of\n                                                            lawyer, forms of counter-analysis, register of experts in the context of criminal\n                                                            law);\n\n\u25cb legal decision-making framework of the court in criminal cases (decision-making schedule\n                                                            laid down in Section 350 of the Dutch Criminal Code of Procedure), also with a view\n                                                            to the relevance of the commission to the expert and to the question at issue;\n\n\u25cb course of the criminal trial;\n\n\u25cb position of the expert in the court procedure.\n\n\u2022 substantive criminal law:\n\n\u25cb sanctions and grounds for exemption from criminal liability (very basic).\n\n\u2022 knowledge of the legal context of safeguarding the quality of the expert and the analysis/investigation:\n\n\u25cb position and role of the co-operating organisations in the criminal justice system\n                                                      in safeguarding the quality of the reports;\n\n\u25cb professional codes and relevant regulations in relation to the NRGD Code of Conduct.\n\n\u2013 In addition to the above requirements, an applicant for the field of expertise DNA\n                                                analysis and interpretation \u2013 Source level:\n\n\u2022 should be familiar with the specific Dutch DNA legislation, and keep abreast of new\n                                                      legislation.\n\n(...) is able to inform the commissioning party whether, and if so, to what extent\n                                             the commissioning party\u2019s question at issue is sufficiently clear and capable of investigation\n                                             in order to be able to answer it on the basis of their specific expertise.\n\nd. \nis able, on the basis of the question at issue, to prepare and carry out an investigation\n                                                   plan in accordance with the applicable standards.\n\ne. \nis able to collect, document, interpret and assess investigative materials and data\n                                                   in a forensic context in accordance with the applicable standards.\n\nf. \nis able to apply the current investigative methods in a forensic context in accordance\n                                                   with the applicable standards.\n\nAn applicant is required to:\n\n\u2013 have insight and experience regarding (forensic) DNA statistics, including:\n\n\u2022 background information, minimally:\n\n\u25cb knowledge of DNA database search controversy;\n\n\u25cb knowledge of both Prosecution and Defence Fallacies;\n\n\u25cb knowledge of the false positive fallacy (knowledge about how to account for the possibilities\n                                                            of errors when reporting a likelihood ratio or match probability);2\n\n\u2022 population genetics;\n\n\u2022 Bayesian and frequentist statistics;\n\n\u2022 knowledge of the terms listed in Annex A;\n\n\u2022 statistical calculations used to estimate the evidential value of a match;\n\n\u2013 be able to define which DNA analyses are to be used and how. An applicant must be\n                                                able to record, assess and interpret the results. An applicant must have a thorough\n                                                knowledge of all methods and be able to explain them; must have knowledge of state-of-the-art\n                                                developments in autosomal and low template/minimal traces DNA Testing methods;\n\n\u2013 be able to adequately answer question 2: From whom does the biological trace originate? In other words, who is the donor of\n                                                   the cellular material? An applicant is also required to possess the know-how to be able to answer question\n                                                1;\n\n\u2013 be aware of the possibilities and limitations of Y-chromosomal Testing methods, Kinship\n                                                DNA Testing, Mitochondrial DNA Testing, Externally Visible Characteristics and reporting\n                                                at Activity level;\n\n\u2013 be aware of the pros and cons of various techniques, specialisations and scientific methods used in the field,\n                                                be aware of and able to explain the possibilities and limitations of these techniques,\n                                                specialisations and methods, be aware of the potential for international searches\n                                                of intelligence databases and follow up on developments thereof.\n\n(...) is able to give a verifiable and well-reasoned case report on the assignment\n                                             and any other relevant aspects of their expertise in terms which are comprehensible\n                                             to the commissioning party, both orally and in writing.\n\nAn applicant is required to:\n\n\u2013 be able, on the basis of the results, to report comprehensively to laymen on an interpretation\n                                                and conclusion (orally and in writing) and to substantiate the results statistically\n                                                where relevant\n\n(...) is able to complete an assignment within the stipulated or agreed period.\n\n(...) is able to carry out the activities as an expert independently, impartially,\n                                             conscientiously, competently, and in a trustworthy manner.\n\nAn applicant should:\n\n\u2013 comply with the NRGD Code of Conduct determined by the Board of Court Experts and\n                                                published on the website of the NRGD.\n\nThe Board may decide not to apply or deviate from a registration requirement if application\n                                          of such requirement would produce very unreasonable results. The hardship clause may\n                                          only offer a solution in certain exceptional situations. It is up to the applicant\n                                          himself to submit facts and circumstances showing that a certain registration requirement\n                                          is unreasonable in his specific case.\n\nIn all fields of expertise the assessment will be based on the written information\n                                          provided, including as a minimum requirement case reports and items of evidence, supplemented\n                                          in principle with an oral assessment. However, such an oral assessment will not be\n                                          necessary if the applicant's expertise has already been clearly demonstrated by the\n                                          written information.\n\nThe assessment will in principle be carried out on the basis of the information provided\n                                          by the applicant:\n\n\u2013 general information as part of the application package\n\n\u2013 documentary evidence of competence.\n\nIf it is felt necessary in the context of the assessment an additional case report\n                                          and/or information, for example information about the way collegial review and/or\n                                          supervision is organized within the organization, can be requested.\n\nDocuments to be submitted:\n\n\u2013 NRGD application form;\n\n\u2013 Statement accompanying the application for registration with the NRGD;\n\n\u2013 Certificate of Good Conduct;\n\n\u2013 a clearly legible copy of a valid passport or identity card;\n\n\u2013 a curriculum vitae (CV), preferably in English;\n\n\u2013 copies of documents relating to the highest level of professional qualification;\n\n\u2013 documentary evidence of the current academic working level;\n\n\u2013 Overview Continued Professional Development DNA- Source level;\n\n\u2013 List of Case Information DNA \u2013 Source level;\n\n\u2013 3 case reports drawn up in the past 2 years selected by the applicant from the List\n                                                            of Case Information. These case reports should provide a clear and broad picture of\n                                                            the applicant\u2019s competencies;\n\n\u2013 if available:\n\n\u2022 proof of the forms of professional development referred to in the Overview Continued\n                                                            Professional Development DNA \u2013 Source level1;\n\n\u2022 a statement concerning the level of accreditation of the applicant\u2019s working environment,\n                                                            where applicable.\n\nAssessment method:\n\nphase a. administrative, by the NRGD Bureau;\n\nphase b. substantive, by an Advisory Committee for Assessment (ACA) made up of at\n                                                            least three people on the basis of the available written material, including possible\n                                                            supplementary written information. In principle this ACA consists of a lawyer and\n                                                            two professional assessors;\n\nphase c. substantive, by the ACA specified at phase b by means of an oral assessment.\n                                                            This oral assessment will be waived if the applicant\u2019s expertise has already been\n                                                            clearly established in phase b;\n\nphase d. decision by the Board: registration, conditional registration or no registration.\n\nExplanation:\n\nIf the ACA has to assess an application after an earlier rejection, a new ACA will\n                                                               be formed if possible. This ACA will not be allowed to inspect the advice given by\n                                                               the previous ACA.\n\n1 It is left to the applicant to decide in which form this evidence is provided, e.g.\n                                             in the form of a logbook or by means of certificates.\n\nDocuments to be submitted:\n\n\u2013 NRGD application form;\n\n\u2013 Statement accompanying the application for registration with the NRGD;\n\n\u2013 Certificate of Good Conduct;\n\n\u2013 a clearly legible copy of a valid passport or identity card;\n\n\u2013 a curriculum vitae (CV), preferably in English;\n\n\u2013 copies of documents relating to the highest level of professional qualification;\n\n\u2013 documentary evidence of the current academic working level;\n\n\u2013 Overview Continued Professional Development DNA- Source level;\n\n\u2013 List of Case Information DNA \u2013 Source level\n\n\u2013 3 case reports drawn up in the past 2 years selected by the applicant from the List\n                                                         of Case Information. These case reports should provide a clear and broad picture of\n                                                         the applicant\u2019s competencies;\n\n\u2013 if available\n\n\u2022 proof of the forms of professional development referred to in the Overview Continued\n                                                         Professional Development DNA \u2013 Source level1;\n\n\u2022 a statement concerning the level of accreditation of the applicant\u2019s working environment,\n                                                         where applicable.\n\nAssessment method:\n\nphase a. administrative, by the NRGD Bureau;\n\nphase b. substantive, by an Advisory Committee for Assessment (ACA) made up of at\n                                                         least three people on the basis of the available written material, including possible\n                                                         supplementary written information. In principle this ACA consists of a lawyer and\n                                                         two professional assessors;\n\nphase c. substantive, by the ACA specified at phase b. by means of an oral assessment.\n                                                         This oral assessment will be waived if the applicant\u2019s expertise has already been\n                                                         clearly established in phase b;\n\nphase d. decision by the Board: registration for a conditional registration or no\n                                                         registration.\n\nExplanation:\n\nIf the ACA has to assess an application after an earlier rejection, a new ACA will\n                                                            be formed if possible. This ACA will not be allowed to inspect the advice given by\n                                                            the previous ACA\n\n1 It is left to the applicant to decide in which form this evidence is provided, e.g.\n                                          in the form of a logbook or by means of certificates.\n\nDocuments to be submitted:\n\n\u2013 NRGD application form;\n\n\u2013 Statement accompanying the application for registration with the NRGD;\n\n\u2013 Certificate of Good Conduct;\n\n\u2013 a clearly legible copy of a valid passport or identity card;\n\n\u2013 an updated curriculum vitae (CV), preferably in English;\n\n\u2013 Overview Continued Professional Development DNA- Source level;\n\n\u2013 List of Case Information DNA \u2013 Source level;\n\n\u2013 2 case reports drawn up in the past 5 years selected by the applicant from the List\n                                                            of Case Information. These case reports should provide a clear and broad picture of\n                                                            the applicant\u2019s competencies;\n\n\u2013 if available\n\n\u2022 proof of the forms of professional development referred to in the Overview Continued\n                                                            Professional Development DNA \u2013 Source level1;\n\n\u2022 a statement concerning the level of accreditation of the applicant\u2019s working environment,\n                                                            where applicable.\n\nAssessment method:\n\nphase a. administrative, by the NRGD Bureau;\n\nphase b. substantive, by an Advisory Committee for Assessment (ACA) made up of at\n                                                            least two people on the basis of the available written material. This ACA will in\n                                                            principle consist of a lawyer and a professional assessor;\n\nphase c. substantive, by the ACA specified at phase b to which one professional assessor\n                                                            is added, drawn from the same field of expertise as the applicant, on the basis of\n                                                            the available written material. This will not be necessary if the ACA unanimously\n                                                            gives a positive recommendation to the Board in phase b;\n\nphase d. substantive, by the ACA specified at phase c by means of an oral assessment.\n                                                            This oral assessment will be waived if the applicant\u2019s expertise has been clearly\n                                                            established in phase c;\n\nphase e. decision by the Board: registration, conditional registration or no registration.\n\nExplanation:\n\nA new ACA will be formed if possible. This ACA will not be allowed to inspect the\n                                                               advice given by the previous ACA.\n\n1 It is left to the applicant to decide in which form this evidence is provided, e.g.\n                                             in the form of a logbook or by means of certificates.\n\nDocuments to be submitted\n\n\u2013 NRGD application form;\n\n\u2013 Statement accompanying the application for registration with the NRGD;\n\n\u2013 a clearly legible copy of a valid passport or identity card;\n\n\u2013 an updated curriculum vitae (CV), preferably in English;\n\n\u2013 Overview Continued Professional Development DNA- Source level;\n\n\u2013 List of Case Information DNA \u2013 Source level;\n\n\u2013 2 case reports drawn up during the registration period selected by the applicant\n                                                            from the List of Case Information. These case reports should provide a clear and broad\n                                                            picture of the applicant\u2019s competencies;\n\n\u2013 if available\n\n\u2022 proof of the forms of professional development referred to in the Overview Continued\n                                                            Professional Development DNA \u2013 Source level1 ;\n\n\u2022 a statement concerning the level of accreditation of the applicant\u2019s working environment,\n                                                            where applicable.\n\nAssessment method\n\nphase a. administrative, by the NRGD Bureau;\n\nphase b. substantive, by an Advisory Committee for Assessment (ACA) made up of at\n                                                            least three people on the basis of the available written material. In principle this\n                                                            ACA consists of a lawyer and two professional assessors;\n\nphase c. substantive, by the ACA specified at phase b by means of an oral assessment.\n                                                            This oral assessment will be waived if the applicant\u2019s expertise has already been\n                                                            clearly established;\n\nphase d. decision by the Board: registration, conditional registration or no registration.\n\nExplanation:\n\nA new ACA will be formed if possible. This ACA will be allowed to inspect the advice\n                                                            given by the previous ACA.\n\n1 It is left to the applicant to decide in which form this evidence is provided, e.g.\n                                             in the form of a logbook or by means of certificates.\n\nThis document contains keywords for concepts of which an expert in the field of DNA- Source level should minimally have a basic knowledge.\n\nForensic biology\n\nSources of DNA evidence\n\nCrime scene investigation and laboratory analysis of biological evidence\n\nIdentification and presumptive testing of body fluids (blood, semen, saliva)\n\nConfirmatory assays for body fluid identification (immunoassays)\n\nUncertainty concerning attribution of DNA (particularly at low levels) to specific\n                                    body fluids\n\nGeneral\n\nThe structure of DNA and the variability of the human DNA genome\n\nLoci, alleles, genotypes and DNA profiles\n\nPolymorphisms commonly used for DNA testing\n\nThe molecular biological basis of forensic DNA tests; using the DNA profile to identify\n                                    a forensic sample\n\nExtraction and quantification of DNA\n\nPolymerase chain reaction\n\nShort tandem repeats and mutation processes\n\nForensic multiplex STR typing kits\n\nDNA separation by CE and LIF detection\n\nAnalysis of results, including the use of ladders for fragment sizing, use of analytical\n                                    thresholds and identification of artefacts such as stutter, \u2018pull-up\u2019 and identification\n                                    of mixed samples.\n\nQC/QA\n\nQuality control and quality assurance of forensic DNA analysis\n\nLaboratory accreditation, personnel certification and proficiency testing\n\nValidation studies\n\nLaboratory error rates\n\nUnderstanding and minimizing the risk of contamination in the forensic process: methods\n                                    of reducing the occurrence of contamination and detecting when it has occurred\n\nContinuous improvement and quality\n\nDNA statistics\n\nLikelihood Ratio (LR)\n\nBayes Theorem\n\nProduct rule to calculate the probability of independent variables\n\nDNA mixture deconvolution and recommended procedures for analysing mixed samples (LR\n                                    and RMNE (\u2018Random Man not Excluded\u2019)/CPI (\u2018Combined Probability of Inclusion\u2019))\n\nAccounting for relatives, where applicable, in calculating evidential strength\n\nDatabase issues\n\nInclusion criteria and search (im)possibilities of the national DNA database including\n                                    the detection of false negative and false positive matches.\n\nPopulation Genetics\n\nHardy-Weinberg equilibrium/Linkage equilibrium\n\nPopulation Substructure\n\nAllele frequencies, genotype probabilities\n\nApplying the product rule for independent events\n\nConditional match probabilities\n\nFst/Theta population substructure correction; correction for possible\n\nallele dropout\n\nSampling variation in construction of DNA population databases\n\nProper Interpretation of the Evidence\n\nCommon Logical Fallacies (Prosecution/Defence Fallacy)\n\nEvidential strength of database match\n\nDNA database search controversy\n\nAvoidance of cognitive bias\n\nMinimal traces (Low Template DNA Analysis)\n\nEvaluation of potential low template DNA typing results.\n\nAllele and/or locus dropout due to degradation, preferential amplification, stochastic\n                                    effects and stochastic thresholds.\n\nReplication and consensus DNA profiles\n\nApproaches for the statistical evaluation of DNA profiles from low template DNA samples\n\nY-chromosome Testing\n\nY-chromosome evolution and its consequences for forensic analyses\n\nPatrilineal inheritance\n\nLaboratory analysis of Y-chromosome STR\u2019s\n\nPopulation genetics of Y-STR haplotypes\n\nUse of Y-STR population databases (YHRD)\n\nStatistical evaluation of Y-chromosome haplotypes\n\nInterpretation of Y-STR mixtures\n\nKinship DNA Testing\n\nInheritance of genetic polymorphisms\n\nTechnical procedures for determining kinship\n\nStatistical evaluation of kinship (e.g. paternity index, sibling index, Bayesian networks)\n\nIncorporation of the presence of mutations and null-alleles in the statistical evaluation\n\nPrinciples of disaster/mass identification\n\nPrinciples of familial searching in databases\n\nUse of Y-STR and mtDNA analysis to narrow candidate lists from familial searching\n                                    in databases\n\nExternally Visible Characteristics\n\nEvolution and migration of Homo sapiens\n\nPopulation genetics of externally visible characteristics\n\nPrinciples of determining the geographic origin of an individual\n\nPrinciples of determining externally visible characteristics\n\nKnowledge about genes involved in the biosynthesis of melanine (skin and hair pigmentation,\n                                    iris colour)\n\nTechnical procedures for determining geographic origin or externally visible characteristics\n\nApproaches for the interpretation of genotyping results for determining geographic\n                                    origin or externally visible characteristics\n\nKnowledge of the limitations of determining geographic origins or externally visible\n                                    characteristics\n\nMitochondrial DNA Testing\n\nMitochondrial DNA evolution and its consequences for forensic analysis\n\nMatrilineal inheritance, variable mutation rates, heteroplasmy and principles for\n                                    evaluating close non-matching mtDNA sequences\n\nLaboratory analysis of mitochondrial DNA (e.g. Sanger sequencing, mini-sequencing)\n\nPopulation genetics of mitochondrial DNA haplotypes\n\nUse of mitochondrial DNA databases (EMPOP)\n\nStatistical evaluation of mitochondrial DNA matches\n\nReporting at Activity level\n\nUnderstanding of the principles of case assessment and interpretation (CAI)3 and in particular, balance, logic, robustness and transparency\n\nFormulation and evaluation of appropriate hypotheses\n\nUnderstanding use of data and experience in evaluation of hypotheses:\n\n\u2022 Knowledge concerning transfer of cells and DNA (primary, secondary, tertiary)\n\n\u2022 Knowledge concerning persistence of DNA and the impact of e.g. environmental conditions\n\n\u2022 Extensive experience of forensic DNA analysis and interpretation in forensic casework\n\n\u2022 Transparency regarding any limitations of the data used\n\nUnderstanding of the principles of probabilistic (Bayesian) networks in evidence interpretation\n\nAdvisory Committee for Assessment\n\nA committee appointed by the Board which advises the Board on the (repeat) applicant\u2019s\n                                                (degree of) suitability for (repeat) registration.\n\nApplicant\n\nNatural person submitting an application to the NRGD in order to be (re-) registered\n                                                in the register.\n\nAssessor\n\nA member of an Advisory Committee for Assessment.\n\nBoard\n\nThe Board of Court Experts is the body as referred to in Section 51k(2) of the Code\n                                                of Criminal Procedure and is charged with managing the register.\n\nBrdis\n\nRegister of Court Experts in Criminal Cases Decree (Besluit register deskundige in strafzaken).\n\nBureau\n\nThe NRGD Bureau that supports the Board.\n\nCollegial review\n\nThe assessment of another person\u2019s work for the purpose of continuous quality control\n                                                of a person\u2019s expertise. There is thereby not a hierarchical but a horizontal relationship\n                                                between colleagues specialised in the same subject area. The reviewer does not sign\n                                                the report.\n\nConditional registration\n\nThe registration of an expert for a period specified by the Board and possibly under\n                                                certain conditions which must be met within that period. In principle the period to\n                                                be specified by the Board is two years.\n\nContinuous professional development\n\nAll (training) activities that contribute to the ongoing development of knowledge\n                                                and skills, which is desirable and necessary in order to be able to continue performing\n                                                the role of court expert in a professional manner.\n\nIndependent reporter\n\nA reporter who has independently prepared and signed the required number of case reports\n\nInitial applicant\n\nAn applicant who makes an application to be entered in the register and does not or\n                                                not yet have an NRGD registration at the time when the application is made.\n\nIntervision\n\nIntervision is a structured (interdisciplinary) meeting between people who are working\n                                                or training in the same professional area. The subject of discussion is in any case\n                                                the forensic work carried out and the associated problems. The aim is to enhance the\n                                                expertise of those involved and improve quality of work. Unlike supervision, there\n                                                is no hierarchical relationship between the participants.\n\nNRGD\n\nThe Netherlands Register of Court Experts of which the Board and the Bureau form part.\n\nRegister\n\nThe national public register as referred to in Section 51 k(1) of the Code of Criminal\n                                                Procedure, which lists the court experts which the Board deems suitable.\n\nRegistered expert\n\nAn expert who is entered in the register.\n\nRegistration\n\nEntry in the register.\n\nRepeat applicant\n\nAn expert who at the time of submitting a repeat application already has a NRGD registration,\n                                                possibly for a temporary period.\n\nReporter\n\nAn individual who issues a report for the administration of justice and/or gives testimony\n                                                in court.\n\nReporter training\n\nA coherent and structured arrangement of organised training activities in which the\n                                                necessary knowledge and experience are acquired to report as a court expert in criminal\n                                                law proceedings and that is completed by an exam.\n\nReporter with no own work\n\nA reporter who has not independently completed and signed the number of case reports\n                                                required for registration.\n\nSupervision\n\nThe assessment of another person\u2019s work, the joint consideration of the work and the\n                                                supervision of a supervisee as part of a training or additional training process.\n                                                Supervisor and supervisee are thereby in a hierarchical relationship. The supervisor\n                                                will observe the subject of the investigation (the investigated person) in such a\n                                                way that they can check the supervisee\u2019s investigation, and can endorse and take responsibility\n                                                for the conclusions thereof. The supervisor will sign the report in all cases.\n\nUser\n\nSomeone who uses the register in order to find and potentially engage a registered\n                                                expert.\n\nVersion\n\nDate\n\nRevisions made\n\n3.0\n\n01.11.2016\n\nGeneric adjustments:\n\n\u2013 addition: generic introduction for all fields of expertise in Part I\n\n\u2013 adjusted description of types of applicants: independent/work of his own\n\n\u2013 differentiation per types of applicants to provide an immediate overview of respective\n                                                requirements (Part III) and assessment procedure (Part IV)\n\n\u2013 number of hours CPD reduced to 40 hours per year for repeat applicants (instead\n                                                of 50)\n\n\u2013 number of case reports adjusted because of extending the registration period;\n\n\u2013 Continued Professional Development (CPD) mandatory for all types of applicants\n\n\u2013 possibility to submit profiles that were interpreted and reported on under supervision\n\n\u2013 possibility to submit profiles that were interpreted and reported on under the supervision\n                                                of the applicant\n\n\u2013 integration of several NRGD policy frameworks in Standards\n\n\u2013 selection of case reports by applicants themselves.\n\n2.1\n\n01.03.2014\n\n\u2013 Y-STRS no longer basic requirement\n\n\u2013 CPD mandatory for repeat applicant\n\n\u2013 generic adjustment in assessment procedure regarding repeat applicants B(iv)\n\n\u2013 adjustment definition complex profile\n\n2.0\n\n28.02.2013\n\nGeneric adjustments:\n\n\u2013 Document containing both Demarcation and Requirements and assessment procedure combined\n\n\u2013 type of applicants\n\n1.4\n\n25.01.2013\n\nField of DNA limited to Source level\n\n1.3\n\n01.07.2012\n\nEvery report should be subjected to collegial review\n\n1.2\n\n01.02.2011\n\nModification assessment procedure:\n\nan oral examination will not take place if the applicant's expertise has already been\n                                                clearly demonstrated.\n\n1.1\n\n29.06.2010\n\nModification assessment procedure\n\n1.0\n\n01.02.2010\n\nFirst edition"}