RegelRecht

Can we transform traditional legislation into machine-executable specifications? We are investigating whether this can narrow the gap between legislator and execution.

What if the way a law is executed were published in machine-executable form alongside the legal text itself? Different parties, from implementing organisations to citizens, could then independently verify and run that execution, and differences in interpretation would become visible instead of being hidden inside code.

How do we make government decisions more transparent? We are experimenting with ways for citizens to see which rules apply and how decisions are reached.

Work on the Rust engine and the tooling that turns Dutch statutes into something computers can run. You advise teams across the Dutch government, design and write code, and work side by side with lawyers who translate rules into machine-readable form. Senior role, in Dutch (fluency required).

Questions? Get in touch with Abram Klop (opgavemanager) or Dian Hoppen (recruiter).

The same law is interpreted and applied differently by different government organisations, leading to inconsistencies and injustice.

Could machine-executable laws reduce interpretation problems? We are investigating whether this can lead to more consistent rule application.

Citizens receive decisions with no explanation of how they were reached. Government as a black box.

Can we make every decision traceable back to the exact rule that was applied? We are exploring options for more transparency in government decisions.

Laws are often written without fully testing whether they are workable in practice. This can cause implementation problems through inconsistencies, ambiguities or practical constraints.

Would machine-executable legislation make it possible to test laws? We are investigating whether inconsistencies and conflicts can be detected early.

Laws as YAML files, with the legal text and the machine-executable rules side by side. A versioned JSON Schema guards the structure. RFC-001

Expected outcomes are captured as readable scenarios. Legal experts and programmers read the same tests, and every change to the rules is validated immediately. Where possible we draw those scenarios straight from the explanatory memorandum.

A deterministic execution engine that runs the YAML rules. Written in Rust and compiled to WebAssembly so the same rules give the same result in the browser and on the server. Documentation

An LLM-based tool that could turn existing analogue law into machine-executable rules. We are exploring what automatic transformation could look like.

A working environment for legal experts to make laws machine-executable. We are still discovering what this editor should look like. Documentation

A visualisation of the relationships between different laws, that could show how changes to one law would ripple through the wider legal landscape.

The library of machine-executable rules. Git handles the version history; a registry ties different sources into a single whole. Documentation

An environment where the consequences of new legislation could be modelled before it takes effect, to surface societal impact and unintended effects. Live demo

A central place for publication and distribution of machine-executable rules, with API access for government systems and private parties.

How do we prevent the accumulation of laws and regulations from making laws unworkable? This project explores developing an analysis tool to test legislative proposals for workability in conjunction with other laws.

Can we develop a general calculation core for government? This project explores how such a system could help execute complex schemes for citizens and businesses, for example when calculating allowances.

This WRR factsheet identifies five points of attention and review questions for parliamentary oversight of the digital execution of legislation. The RegelRecht project falls within the scope of this factsheet and can be assessed against the proposed criteria for transparency, traceability and democratic control.

This factsheet for the House of Representatives’ Standing Committee on Digital Affairs names six rule-of-law risks of digital law execution, including opacity and translation problems between legal text and code, and argues for traceability of algorithms back to their legal source.

Zuurmond observes that current information management supports a bureaucratic, reactive government too strongly based on distrust of citizens. He argues for a responsive government with better information provision.

The Court of Audit tested 9 algorithms at various government organisations and found that 6 of them carried risks around performance management, bias, data leaks or unauthorised access. The report stresses the need for continuous monitoring.

This first systematic study of algorithm use by the Dutch government found that algorithms focus mainly on government needs, with limited attention to ethical aspects and citizen insight.

The Council of State stresses the importance of implementation assessments and collaboration between policy makers, legislative lawyers and implementing organisations in multidisciplinary teams, and argues for better testing of workability and citizens’ ability to act.

The State Commission observes that demographic developments put pressure on the accessibility of government services such as education, healthcare and housing.

The study group concludes that digitising government requires a radical change of mindset and that digital service delivery belongs at the core of the primary process.

This report analyses problems at implementing organisations such as the Tax Administration, DUO and UWV: continuity risks, limited agility when policy changes, and missing options for tailored solutions.

This action plan was drawn up in response to the 'Unprecedented injustice' report and focuses on structurally improving information management across central government.

Legal rules are written as executable code that computers can run and apply directly, without human interpretation or programmers in between. Is that achievable? And how does it relate to traditional analogue law?

No. RegelRecht explores whether the way a law is executed can be published, not whether one party decides what is true. The competent authority publishes its reading as the authoritative interpretation, but other organisations, lawyers and citizens can publish their reading alongside it. Execution is not tied to a single engine either: multiple independent implementations must produce the same outcome on the same rules and data. What becomes central is publication and verifiability, not interpretation itself.

Laws deliberately leave room for interpretation: terms that are filled in "by ministerial regulation", or concepts that leave a judgement to the implementing body. In ordinary automation that room quietly disappears into code: the choice the programmer makes effectively becomes law, with no publication or scrutiny. RegelRecht turns that choice into something explicit instead: the higher law marks an open norm, the lower regulation fills it in, and lawyers can record whether a concept is fully, partly or not yet filled in. That makes visible where the statute ends and interpretation begins. Genuinely human judgements inside a decision process, such as a hardship clause or a case-by-case assessment by an official, stay human work; we are not trying to automate those away.

The format is YAML, with legal text and machine-executable rules side by side in a single file. A versioned JSON Schema guards the structure, and BDD scenarios capture the intended outcomes. Legal experts can read along, developers can contribute, and different government systems can use the same rules. Read RFC-011

Can RegelRecht validate existing implementations and serve as a reference for new systems? Existing systems are not directly replaced, but verification and modernisation come within reach.

RegelRecht is a technical aid. Legal validity remains with the original legislation. The open question is whether it can help with consistent interpretation and application.

By making rules explicit in code, citizens and organisations can see exactly how decisions are reached, instead of relying on opaque systems.