In this contribution attention is paid to the development of private international law in the Netherlands. The establishment of the Hague Conference on Private International law in 1893 is taken as a starting point. The development of the Conference is roughly sketched. In 1910 the Netherlands Society of International Law was founded, the first national branch of the ILA. An overview is given of the Society's preliminary reports dealing with matters of private international law. The codification of PIL was the subject of the Society's annual meeting in 1990, where the importance of a step-by-step codification was emphasized. The development towards codification is discussed. Codification had already started in 1981 and would come to an end in 2009 with the introduction of the bill on Book 10 of the Dutch Civil Code. It may be expected that the bill will be adopted by Parliament in 2011. Attention is paid to this bill, which introduces the further codification and consolidation of the existing statutes on PIL and recombines them in Book 10 of the Civil Code.

International organisations are endowed with privileges and immunities to safeguard their independence, including, in particular, vis-à-vis their host state. This article first briefly considers the sources of privileges and immunities applicable to international organisations in the Netherlands, which is the host state of many international organizations. The article then focuses on the immunity of international organisations from the jurisdiction of the Dutch courts. The article reviews the relevant national case law in which there have been important developments in recent years against the backdrop of the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights. In respect of international organisations that enjoy immunity formulated in ‘functional’ (as opposed to ‘absolute’) terms, the article develops some general guidance to determine when that immunity applies. The article then considers the clash between an international organisation's entitlement to jurisdictional immunity and the rights of claimants to have access to the courts under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The article suggests that whether the right to immunity prevails depends on the extent to which the particular organisation's functionality is at issue. In this light, the article critically examines the recent judgements in the incidental proceedings in the Srebrenica case against the United Nations. Finally, in terms of the procedural position of international organisations before the Dutch courts, the article suggests that to enjoy jurisdictional immunity, organisations would be well-advised to actively challenge the jurisdiction of the courts.

This article analyses the Dutch practice on the prosecution of international crimes with a view to determining whether this practice has been inspired by or has informed developments at the international level and more generally to analyzing how Dutch practice interrelates with international developments. The article singles out three episodes. First, a prelude of frustration in which the extradition of the German Kaiser was refused (1918-1920). Subsequently, two periods of engagement, which were to some extent inspired by international proceedings (1946-1951 and 1994-today). In these periods, Dutch courts demonstrated their commitment to the project of international criminal justice and they have produced insightful judgments which have even served as a source of law and a source of inspiration to contemporary international criminal law adjudication. The article has been written on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the Netherlands Society of International Law.

In the 2007 Government Memorandum to Parliament entitled Human dignity for all. A human rights strategy for foreign policy, the Netherlands Minister for Foreign Affairs, Maxime Verhagen, examined the interrelationship between human rights, peace and security. In this context, the Minister also addressed the relationship between counter-terrorism strategies and international law, specifically human rights instruments and international humanitarian law. The Minister referred to the Oud-Poelgeest seminar of April 2007 and announced further initiatives in this field. In a subsequent Plan of Action, Minister Verhagen specified the ways in which the Dutch government sought to implement the Human Rights Strategy in the field of combating terrorism. Among the concrete policy measures to be taken featured the initiation of a Follow-up Process to the Oud-Poelgeest project.