Prisoners who released the wrong prisoner will not get their jobs back

A ruling made public today shows that the subdistrict court in Haarlem does not agree with the blundering guards. At the time of the ruling, two and a half months after the incident, the mistakenly released detainee was still at large.

Long employment

The men had long and impeccable employment with the Judicial Institutions Service of 11 and 28 years respectively. There they worked at the Delinquent Entry Department (BAD) of the Schiphol Detention Center.

In that position – known internally as ‘lifeguard’ – they were responsible for the reception and departure of prisoners. At Schiphol, for example, this concerns asylum seekers (who may or may not have exhausted their legal remedies), but also, for example, people who are taking pills.

Wrong released

On the evening of August 17, the guards were ordered to release a detainee. They did not follow the procedures correctly, which meant that the wrong prisoner – with the same surname – could be released.

When the Schiphol Detention Center discovered the error a day later, an arrest warrant was issued to arrest the wrongly released prisoner. But that had not yet been achieved at the beginning of this month; the man is still walking around freely. It is unclear what he had in mind.

Transfer

The two guards responsible were suspended by their employer, and ultimately punished with a transfer to another position in the detention center. That was also a demotion for one of them. They partly owed it to their long and impeccable employment that they were not dismissed.

Yet the employees were not satisfied with their punishment; they went to court to get their old jobs back. According to them, the procedures were not clear and their mistake was due to understaffing and workload.

Shameful

Both employees believe the punishment is too severe and feel that they have already been punished sufficiently due to the far-reaching personal consequences of the incident. “Their lives have been turned upside down, they sleep poorly and experience the transfer as very embarrassing,” their lawyer told the court.

Although the subdistrict court judge in Haarlem believes that the guards had an ‘urgent interest’ in having their case processed, they are otherwise not in favor. According to the judge, the procedures were clear and the men should have known and implemented them, especially given their long employment.

The subdistrict court judge also emphasizes that they should have been expected to perform their duties alertly and carefully. “Particularly because making a mistake can have serious consequences, as has now become apparent because the wrongly released detainee is still walking around freely.”

Workload

The judge does acknowledge that there is structural understaffing at the detention center at Schiphol. For example, on the evening in question there were not the usual six, but only four ‘lifeguards’ working. “It is not implausible that this could lead to errors,” he said pronunciation.

However, the subdistrict court judge does not find it plausible that work pressure was the cause of the security blunder in this case. The men could easily have carried out the release that evening at a later, less hectic time.

Key role

Finally, the subdistrict court judge also finds it not unjustified that the prison guards were punished differently than other employees involved in the release. A factor in this is that the two employees in question (almost literally) played the key role in the procedure, and therefore bore greater responsibility.

This means that the guards will not get their old position back. They must also pay their employer’s legal costs of 793 euros.