Who administers the Advocatenopleiding Instaptoets?

Stichting CDR provides the Advocatenopleiding in cooperation with the Surinaamse Orde van Advocaten. The current provider page advertises the 2027–2029 training cycle starting in January 2027 and requires the entrance assessment, a qualifying law diploma with civiel effect, and a positive OM background investigation.

Does this practice bank reproduce the official assessment?

No. This is an independent English-language MCQ study adaptation, not an official translation or a format simulation. The current public notice does not specify item types, item count, duration, or permitted assessment languages. Obtain those instructions and the toetsmatrijs from CDR, and practice legal writing and other required skills separately.

Are the topic percentages official?

No. CDR confirms three entrance subjects: strafrecht, privaatrecht (NBW), and bestuursrecht. Our 35%, 40%, and 25% allocations describe this practice bank only; the detailed matrix is supplied directly to candidates.

What are the current fee and pass mark?

Neither was confirmed for the current cycle. The 2025–2027 notice quoted SRD 2,500 for the instaptoets, while the 2026–2028 notice said its amount would be announced later. The 2023–2025 plan used scoring bands of 70–100, 50–69, and below 50, with conditional admission and extra assignments in the middle band. Those historical figures must not be treated as current rules without confirmation from CDR.

Does passing the entrance assessment complete the professional qualification?

No. The Advocatenopleiding is a separate two-year professional program with theoretical activities and a compulsory practical stage. Its published plan and examination rules describe an ethics test, two practical simulations, compulsory assignments, and other completion requirements.

All Practice Exams

Free Practice Questions for Advocatenopleiding Instaptoets

Exam-style questions and explanations by OpenExamPrep.

✓ No registration✓ No credit card

40+ Questions

100% Free

Loading practice questions...

Exam Review

Key Facts: Advocatenopleiding Instaptoets Exam

3 subjects

Criminal law, private law (NBW), and administrative law

CDR current Advocatenopleiding notice, checked 2026-10-17

2 opportunities

Regular assessment and herkansing

CDR current Advocatenopleiding notice, checked 2026-10-17

2 years

Subsequent professional training, separate from entrance-test duration

CDR current Advocatenopleiding page, checked 2026-10-17

CDR identifies strafrecht, privaatrecht (NBW), and bestuursrecht as the entrance subjects and provides candidates with a toetsmatrijs. Use these independent English-language MCQs to review legal concepts, and obtain current assessment instructions directly from CDR.

Sample Advocatenopleiding Instaptoets Practice Questions

Try these sample questions to review concepts for the Advocatenopleiding Instaptoets exam. Each question includes a detailed explanation. Start the interactive quiz above for the full 40+ question experience with AI tutoring.

1A person performs an act before any statutory provision makes it a criminal offense. Which conclusion follows from the legality principle in Suriname?

A.A later criminal prohibition cannot retrospectively make that earlier act punishable

B.A later prohibition applies if the prosecutor considers the act seriously harmful

C.A later prohibition applies if the court imposes only a fine

D.A later prohibition applies whenever the conduct also caused civil damage

Explanation: Article 1 of the Surinamese Wetboek van Strafrecht requires a penal provision preceding the act. Civil unlawfulness or the seriousness of harm cannot supply a missing prior criminal prohibition.

2A foreign visitor commits an ordinary theft entirely within Suriname. No immunity or other international-law exception applies. Which jurisdictional principle supplies the ordinary basis for applying Surinamese criminal law?

A.Active nationality, because the offender's citizenship must supply the jurisdictional basis

B.Universality, because ordinary theft is prosecutable everywhere without a territorial connection

C.Passive nationality, because jurisdiction must depend on the victim's nationality

D.Territoriality, because the offense occurred within Suriname

Explanation: Article 2 of the Wetboek van Strafrecht applies Surinamese criminal law to anyone committing an offense within Suriname. The territorial rule does not require the offender to be a Surinamese citizen.

3Under the general provisions of Suriname's Wetboek van Strafrecht, how do attempt and complicity apply to an overtreding, as distinct from a misdrijf?

A.The general attempt provision concerns misdrijven, and complicity in an overtreding is not punishable

B.Attempt is generally punishable for an overtreding, but complicity is not

C.Both are punishable for every overtreding on the same basis as for a misdrijf

D.Complicity is generally punishable for an overtreding, but attempt is not

Explanation: The general attempt provision addresses an attempt to commit a misdrijf. The code separately excludes punishment for medeplichtigheid in an overtreding; that distinction does not exempt a person who actually perpetrates the overtreding.

4An accused intended to commit a misdrijf, but it was not completed. What must the prosecution establish to move beyond mere intention to a punishable attempt under the general attempt provision?

A.That the accused privately decided on a time and place

B.That the accused discussed the plan with a friend

C.That the intention manifested itself through a beginning of execution (begin van uitvoering)

D.That the accused had previously committed a similar offense

Explanation: A criminal intention must manifest itself in a beginning of execution for the general attempt provision to apply. Mere planning is not automatically an attempt, although separate statutory provisions can make certain preparatory conduct punishable.

5A court finds that execution of a planned misdrijf began, but that it remained uncompleted because of circumstances dependent on the accused's own will, satisfying vrijwillige terugtred. What follows for punishment of the attempt?

A.The attempt remains punishable, but the court must halve the sentence

B.The attempt is not punishable, while any independently completed offense must be assessed separately

C.Only preparatory conduct can benefit from voluntary withdrawal once execution has begun

D.Withdrawal removes liability for every earlier offense connected with the plan

Explanation: The code excludes punishment for preparation or attempt when the crime remains uncompleted because of circumstances dependent on the actor's will. This does not erase independently completed offenses, such as an unlawful weapons offense.

6Two accused persons divide tasks in committing an offense. One argues that co-perpetration (medeplegen) is impossible because only the other physically performed the final act. Which assessment is appropriate?

A.Accept the argument because each co-perpetrator must personally perform every element

B.Examine whether there was sufficiently close, conscious cooperation and a contribution of sufficient weight

C.Reject the argument solely because the accused persons know one another

D.Treat any assistance, however slight, as necessarily establishing co-perpetration

Explanation: The Hof van Justitie describes medeplegen in terms of sufficiently close and conscious cooperation and a substantial intellectual or material contribution. Task division is compatible with co-perpetration, but mere association or incidental assistance is not enough by itself.

7An organizer intentionally offers a payment to induce another person to commit a misdrijf. That person refuses and takes no execution steps. Which statement best describes the significance of the refusal under Surinamese criminal law?

A.It necessarily excludes all liability because the intended offense was not attempted

B.It prevents completed incitement of that offense but does not exclude the separate statutory rule on attempted inducement (mislukte uitlokking)

C.It establishes completed co-perpetration of the intended offense

D.It makes the organizer liable for the completed intended offense solely because money was offered

Explanation: The code expressly addresses an attempt to induce another to commit a misdrijf through the statutory means of incitement. Failure to persuade the other person therefore does not, by itself, make the organizer's conduct non-punishable.

8Which description correctly identifies the protected interests and attack required by the ordinary self-defense rule (noodweer) in Suriname?

A.Defense of one's own body only, against an attack expected at some future time

B.Defense of one's commercial reputation against any damaging criticism

C.Defense of one's own property only, including retaliation after the attack has ended

D.Necessary defense of one's own or another's body, sexual integrity, or property against an immediate unlawful attack

Explanation: Noodweer concerns necessary defense against an immediate unlawful attack on the specified interests of the actor or another person. A wish to retaliate after the danger has ended does not satisfy that defensive basis.

9A court distinguishes necessary self-defense (noodweer) from excessive defense caused directly by intense emotion provoked by an unlawful attack (noodweerexces). Which classification is correct?

A.Both are excuses that leave the defensive conduct unlawful

B.Both are justifications that make the defensive force lawful

C.Noodweer is an excuse; noodweerexces is a justification

D.Noodweer is a justification; noodweerexces is an excuse concerning the actor's culpability

Explanation: The Surinamese code places necessary defense among rechtvaardigingsgronden and attack-induced emotional excess among schulduitsluitingsgronden. Excessive force is therefore not declared lawful merely because the actor qualifies for an excuse.

10Both doodslag and moord involve intentionally depriving another person of life. Which additional element distinguishes moord?

A.Use of a firearm

B.Premeditation (voorbedachten rade)

C.A financial motive

D.A victim who holds public office

Explanation: The statutory definition of moord adds voorbedachten rade to intentional killing. The weapon, motive, or victim's occupation does not by itself establish that additional element.

About the Advocatenopleiding Instaptoets Practice Questions

Check the official exam sponsor for the exam format, time limit, passing standard, fees, and eligibility requirements. These details are not yet confirmed here.