A screenshot from the “National Gazette”.
PHILIPSBURG--A number of Ministerial Decrees concerning healthcare professionals’ authorisations and healthcare institutions’ permits published in the October 9, 2026 edition of the National Gazette (Landscourant) are riddled with errors.
The issues identified include missing decree dates or numbers, unresolved reference fields, unclear validity periods, inconsistent names, conflicting dates and other errors.
While these issues do not necessarily mean that the authorisations or permits were invalid, they can may make individual decisions difficult to interpret.
The publication contains several instances of the text “Error! Reference source not found.” This error appears, among other places, on pages 17, 43 and 45. It is particularly significant on page 55, where the decree states that it is “valid from Error! Reference source not found. until Error! Reference source not found.” In this case, both the commencement and expiry dates of the decree’s stated validity period have been replaced by unresolved reference-source errors. The published text therefore does not disclose the applicable validity dates.
Several decrees appear to use gender-inappropriate pronouns when referring to healthcare professionals. Examples can be found on pages 7, 11, 19, 21, 25, 33, 35, 49, 65, 79, 89, 93, 97, and 101, among others. On page 79, for example, the decision refers to Dr. Katrien Hinderkien Korver’s “his performance,” despite other wording indicating that the professional is female. On page 97, the decision refers to Dr. Naèla Abdalla using “his performance,” while also referring to “her BIG registration.” Similarly, on page 101, the decision refers to Dr. Nova Danique van den Bogerd using “his performance,” while other provisions use “her BIG registration.”
On pages 132 and 133, the decision concerning Dr. Valentijn Webers contains an empty paragraph labelled “j.” Such remnants can create uncertainty as to whether a condition or requirement was intended to appear in the decision.
Several decisions contain incomplete headings in which the decree date, decree number, or both are missing. The omissions are not uniform. On page 10, the decision concerning Dr. Amadu Elandi Juliana does not state either the date or the decree number. On page 14, the date is missing from the decision concerning Dr. Anthony Johannes Wilhelmus Raijmakers, although a decree number appears. On page 20, both the date and decree number are missing from the decision concerning Dr. Bart Johannes Petrus Coppens.
The decision concerning Danette Rosaline Gumbs on page 24 also lacks both the date and decree number. On page 30, the date is missing, although decree number 2026-905 appears. On page 38, the decree number is missing from the decision concerning Dr. Eric Wim Lindstedt. Both the date and decree number are missing from the decision concerning Dr. Gerlof Johannes Jukema on page 58, and both are also missing from the decision concerning Dr. Joeri de Hoog on page 70. On page 82, the date is missing from the decision concerning Manual Therapy Steffans B.V., although a decree number appears.
The date is missing from the decision concerning Dr. Margot Dellaert on page 84, although a decree number is provided. Both the date and decree number are missing from the decision concerning Dr. Mieke Hooijschuur on page 92. The decision concerning Noah Doeland on page 98 also lacks both the date and decree number.
On page 114, the date is missing from the decision concerning Rebecca Brent, although a decree number appears, while on page 116 the date is missing from the decision concerning Dr. Reina Maatman, although a decree number is provided. These omissions make it more difficult to establish the precise identity, chronology, and legal status of the affected decisions.
Some decrees contain unusual or incomplete wording concerning the period of validity. The decree concerning Dr. Josta Wismeijer gives a specific period for her call-up emergency-physician role, stating that it is valid “from July 25, 2025, until July 24, 2026, for Call-up ER Physician.” However, for her general-practitioner authorisation, the decree states only that it is valid for two years and does not specify an exact expiry date.
The decree concerning Dr. Robert Anthonius Scheeren contains a clear internal inconsistency regarding the year. The heading on page 120 refers to “November 12, 2026, no. 2025-2121,” while the signature on page 121 is dated “November 12, 2025.” Because the decree number also begins with 2025, the 2026 date in the heading appears to be a typographical or drafting error.
The decree concerning Dr. Willibrordus Maria Boek also appears to contain a chronology and numbering problem. The decision itself is dated November 25, 2025, but refers to a previous decree dated January 22, 2026, identified as decree number 2024-07. A decision dated November 25, 2025, would ordinarily not refer to a previous decision dated January 22, 2026.
Dr. Joeri de Hoog’s name appears with different spellings in the same series of decrees. Some passages use “e/v Baar,” while others use “e/v Baars.” The heading and several provisions use “Baar,” while other provisions use “Baars.” This inconsistency should be corrected to ensure that the professional is consistently and accurately identified throughout the decision.
The decree concerning the physical-therapy provider also uses two different names. It refers both to “Manual Therapy Steffens B.V.” and “Manual Therapy Steffans B.V.” The correct legal spelling cannot be established from the Landscourant publication alone. The inconsistency should nevertheless be corrected or verified against the institution’s official registration.
The Mental Health Foundation is likewise identified in several different forms, including “The Mental Health Foundation,” and “St. Mental Health Foundation.” These variations refer to the same organisation, but the publication should use one consistent and legally accurate name.
The decrees also contain several grammatical errors involving indefinite articles. Examples include “an Pediatrician” instead of “a Pediatrician” or “a paediatrician,” “a ER Physician” instead of “an ER Physician,” “an Psychiatrist” instead of “a Psychiatrist,” “an Speech Therapist” instead of “a Speech Therapist,” and “an Medical Doctor” instead of “a Medical Doctor.”
Other documents also appear to contain drafting or template-related problems, including incomplete references and inconsistent formatting.
Overall, the October 9, 2026 decrees published in the National Gazette contains a substantial number of apparent defects. The most significant issues concern missing decree dates and numbers, unresolved reference-source errors, incomplete or unclear validity periods, conflicting dates and apparent chronology errors, inconsistent professional and institutional names, incorrect or inconsistent gender pronouns, grammatical errors involving professional titles, empty template paragraphs, and inconsistent currency notation.
These problems do not, by themselves, establish that the healthcare professionals’ authorisations or the institutions’ permits were invalid. They do show, however, that the published decisions would benefit from careful proofreading, legal-quality control, and correction or republication where necessary. Corrected versions would help ensure that healthcare professionals, institutions, regulators, employers, insurers, and members of the public can determine precisely who is authorised, for which specialty or service, under what conditions, and for what period.
