Justitiële verkenningen

Meer op het gebied van Criminologie en veiligheid

Over dit tijdschrift  
Aflevering 8, 2011 Alle samenvattingen uitklappen


Auteurs Marit Scheepmaker

Marit Scheepmaker

    This article focuses on a phenomenon often called ‘function creep’. This is the process whereby new functions are added to systems that are basically intended for other purposes, or when systems or data originally intended for function A are linked to other systems or data having function B. New technical possibilities have definitely paved the way for function creep and a growing number of ICT-applications appear no longer limited to the purpose for which they were originally set up. Function creep is an inherent feature of innovation. But at the same time it poses risks if considered from a privacy perspective. After detailing many examples of function creep, the article elaborates on a potential risk not often discussed: loss of data quality. The analysis concludes in arguing that citizens can act as a crucial countervailing power to limit the expansion of function creep. This however requires that governments are more open and accountable to allow for a transparent and verifiable comparison between the interests at stake.

J.E.J. Prins
Prof.mr. Corien Prins is hoogleraar aan het Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society (TILT), Universiteit van Tilburg en Raadslid bij de Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid (WRR). Deze bijdrage is voor een belangrijk deel ontleend aan het rapport iOverheid van de Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid (maart 2011, zie: www.wrr.nl), dat onder haar verantwoordelijkheid werd opgesteld.

Hoe waarschijnlijk is function creep?

Een beleidswetenschappelijke analyse

Auteurs M.S. de Vries

    In this article it is argued that function creep is a structural phenomenon which is inherent in policy development. The author discusses several policy development theories which might be useful in trying to explain the phenomenon that policy instruments tend to be applied in reaching purposes never intended at the time these instruments were developed.
    Kingdon's streams model, the classic phase-oriented approach (e.g. Hoogerwerf), Sabatier's advocacy coalition theory as well as Walker's diffusion theory give various explanations for the phenomenon of function creep. But crucial is that policy makers are always looking for new innovating policy instruments to achieve their objects. According to the author it is almost impossible to prevent function creep. To some degree the abuse of function creep can be prevented by institutionalising these processes and to submit them to democratic control, checks and balances, procedures and other guarantees. But this will never be enough to escape from the ‘voyeurist society’.

M.S. de Vries
Prof. dr. Michiel de Vries is als hoogleraar Bestuurskunde verbonden aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen en als bijzonder hoogleraar aan de Universiteit van Aruba. E-mail: m.devries@fm.ru.nl.

Terrorismebestrijding en securitisering

Een rechtssociologische verkenning van de neveneffecten

Auteurs B.A. de Graaf en Q. Eijkman

    This article offers an analysis of the side effects caused by the increased counterterrorism measures adapted in Dutch law and public policy after 9/11. Taking clues from Foucault's thinking on securitisation and Beck's risk society, it is argued that focus, referent subject and object of security measures and deployment of counterterrorism laws have shifted from the concrete individual to society and risk prevention as a whole (1), that this shift induces function creep (2) and a much quicker deployment of measures, resulting in an increasing suspect population (3). Rather than arguing against the legality and legitimacy of these measures, the authors analyse the epistemological shift in reasoning and unpack the various probabilistic arguments (as opposed to evidence-based arguments) behind the wave of securitisation after 9/11 - resulting in a lack of knowledge about, transparency and accountability of the generated side effects.

B.A. de Graaf
Dr. Beatrice de Graaf (universitair hoofddocent) is verbonden aan het Centrum voor Terrorisme en Contraterrorisme van de Universiteit Leiden (Campus Den Haag).

Q. Eijkman
Mr. dr. Quirine Eijkman (senioronderzoeker) is verbonden aan het Centrum voor Terrorisme en Contraterrorisme van de Universiteit Leiden (Campus Den Haag).

    Intervention teams are among the most discussed tools in the current process of securitisation. Their integrated approach takes into account all underlying causes of insecurity and quality of life. For a more effective approach authorities and organisations have to cooperate and let go of their mutual boundaries. But can the participants put aside their differences in perspectives and policies? This article discusses the goal of ‘ontkokering’ (‘decompartalisation’), this was done through a study of the practices of intervention team SIP in Amsterdam. On basis of thirteen interviews and observations the authors argue that there are three main mechanisms or ‘molar barriers’, which conserve the old structures in the integrated approach of the intervention team: ‘methodical robustness’, ‘institutional robustness’ and ‘financial robustness’.

M. Schuilenburg
Mr. Drs. Marc Schuilenburg is werkzaam bij de afdeling Strafrecht en Criminologie van de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam. Hij is tevens redactieraadlid van Justitiële verkenningen. Zie: www.marcschuilenburg.nl.

C. Dijkstra
Catharina Dijkstra MSc studeerde criminologie aan de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam.