Recht der Werkelijkheid

Meer op het gebied van Algemeen

Over dit tijdschrift  

Meld u zich hier aan voor de attendering op dit tijdschrift zodat u direct een mail ontvangt als er een nieuw digitaal nummer is verschenen en u de artikelen online kunt lezen.

Aflevering 1, 2023 Alle samenvattingen uitklappen

Nienke Doornbos
Nienke Doornbos is universitair hoofddocent Rechtssociologie aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Het redactioneel is haar laatste bijdrage als voorzitter van de redactie van Recht der Werkelijkheid.

Access_open Drafting New Rape Law

How Dutch Legislators Talk About Sexual Consent

Trefwoorden rape, sexual consent, the Netherlands, sexual violence, criminal law
Auteurs Hoko Horii en Annelien Bouland

    There is a growing European trend toward the adoption of consent-based definitions of rape. A number of countries recently reformed their rape law or are in the process of doing so, thus raising questions about the way consent is understood as well as the motivations that are provided for such reforms. This article focuses on the Netherlands where the reform process is ongoing. It provides a close-reading of the preparatory documents and finds that (1) legislators initially motivated the reform to ‘lower the threshold’ for the prosecution, but the frame of the threshold recedes to the background as the objective of the reform shifts and the definition of consent widens; (2) the shift of ‘social norm’ regarding unwanted sex is both the main justification and key goal of legal reform, and (3) the new law introduces negligent crime for rape and sexual assault and discussion centres on mental state.

Hoko Horii
Hoko Horii is an assistant professor at the Van Vollenhoven Institute. Her expertise lies in socio-legal studies, legal philosophy, human rights law, and children’s rights. How does law stipulate ‘rights’, and for whom are they just and fair and for whom are they not just and fair? How does law reflect, influence, reinforce, and control our sense of ‘righteousness’? She addresses these questions with concrete case studies over different projects. For her PhD research, she examined the concept of agency in international human rights, based on a case study of child marriage. She is currently engaged in several collaborative research projects on age of consent law and sexual violence law. https://hokohorii.com/

Annelien Bouland
Annelien Bouland is a socio-legal scholar. She holds a post-doc and lecturer position at the Social Sciences Department of the University Carlos III in Madrid. Her research draws on qualitative methods and focuses on the intersections of law, gender and family.

Sentencing with(out) Forensic Mental Health Information

Trefwoorden forensic mental health report, sentencing, mental disorder, recidivism risk, the Netherlands
Auteurs Roosmarijn van Es, Jan de Keijser, Janne van Doorn e.a.

    In the Netherlands, a pretrial forensic mental health report (FMHR) can be requested to inform the court whether a mental disorder was present at the time of the offense, whether this disorder affected behaviour and decision-making at the time of the offense, how this disorder may affect future behaviour and advise on possible treatment measures. However, a substantial number of defendants refuse to cooperate with FMHRs to avoid being sentenced to a forensic psychiatric hospital for at least two years (TBS). With an experimental vignette study among law and criminology students (N = 355), we tested whether TBS is less likely for an uncooperative defendant than for a cooperative defendant. Second, we tested whether an uncooperative defendant receives a longer prison sentence when TBS is not imposed. Results showed that refusing to cooperate reduces the likelihood of a TBS measure and that this is compensated by a slightly longer prison sentence. Extending international research, we explored whether type of disorder and recidivism risk in an FMHR had an effect on sentencing. Results show that schizophrenia led to TBS more often than antisocial personality disorder regardless of recidivism risk. Type of disorder or recidivism risk did not substantially affect the prison sentence regardless of whether TBS had been imposed. Recommendations for research and practice are discussed.

Roosmarijn van Es
Roosmarijn van Es is docent bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden. Haar promotieonderzoek richt zich op de rol van informatie in pro Justitia-rapportages in rechterlijke beslissingen over bewijs en straf.

Jan de Keijser
Jan de Keijser is hoogleraar Criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Janne van Doorn
Janne van Doorn is universitair docent bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Maarten Kunst
Maarten Kunst is hoogleraar Criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Recht spreken én schrijven

Hoe (on)tevredenheid over de communicatie de acceptatie van de rechterlijke beslissing beïnvloedt

Trefwoorden perceived outcome fairness, interpersonal justice, informational justice, justification in judicial decisions, interactional justice
Auteurs Geerke van der Bruggen, Henk Pander Maat en Leonie van Lent

    There is a growing interest in judicial communication – i.e. the interaction of judges with parties in court and the communicative quality of (written) judicial decisions. The aim of our research was to find out more about the role of these communicative aspects, specifically of specific text elements in judicial decisions, in outcome justice judgments of – different types of – litigating parties.
    Respondents in this research were three types of parties involved in administrative court proceedings: citizens, their lawyers, and the officials that represent the government. When receiving the written judicial decision in their case, they also got our questionnaire.
    All types of litigants in our research perceived a higher level of outcome fairness when the decision was favorable for them. Apart from that, the perceived outcome fairness also depended on the respondents’ trust in judges and their judgments about the judicial communication during the court hearing (interpersonal justice) and in the written court decision (informational justice).
    For citizens, outcome favorability did not influence the effect of these factors on perceived outcome fairness. In this respect a clear difference between non-professionals and professionals was found. For both types of professionals involved (the lawyers and the government representatives), trust in judges was more important with low outcome favorability. Only for government officials interpersonal justice was more important in perceived outcome fairness if the outcome was unfavorable.
    This means that good interaction with the judge during the court hearing and an understandable and convincing court decision always matter for citizens, regardless of the outcome. At the same time, citizens are the least satisfied litigants when it comes to judicial communication. Also their general trust in judges is lower. As legitimacy of the judiciary is an important goal of judicial communication, the Dutch judiciary is rightly investing in better communication with (litigating) citizens.

Geerke van der Bruggen
Geerke van de Bruggen is schrijftrainer en tekstschrijver bij Brug in Bedrijf. Zij werkt aan een promotieonderzoek over de (on)begrijpelijkheid van rechterlijke uitspraken bij Taal en Communicatie en Rechtsgeleerdheid aan de Universiteit Utrecht.

Henk Pander Maat
Henk Pander Maat is universitair hoofddocent bij de faculteit Geesteswetenschappen, disciplinegroep Taal en Communicatie en bij het UiL-OTS, Universiteit Utrecht. Hij houdt zich bezig met de kwaliteit van teksten waarmee experts leken proberen te bereiken, en waarmee organisaties klanten proberen te bereiken.

Leonie van Lent
Leonie van Lent is universitair hoofddocent strafprocesrecht aan het Willem Pompe Instituut voor Strafrechtswetenschappen en het Montaigne Centrum voor Rechtsstaat en Rechtspleging, beide departement Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zij houdt zich bezig met de betekenis van de eis van openbaarheid voor het strafproces, bijvoorbeeld voor vormgeving en begrijpelijkheid daarvan, en voor participatie van burgers.

Ashley Terlouw
Ashley Terlouw is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie aan de Radboud Universiteit. Haar onderzoek concentreert zich op non-discriminatie, asiel en de werking van juridische instituties. Zij is lid van de Staatscommissie tegen discriminatie en racisme.

Gijsbert Vonk
Gijsbert Vonk is professor of social security law at Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

Marijke ter Voert
Marijke ter Voert is hoogleraar Empirical Legal Studies aan de Radboud Universiteit. Doel van de leeropdracht is empirisch onderzoek binnen de rechtswetenschap te stimuleren.

Lisa Ansems
Lisa Ansems is postdoctoraal onderzoeker bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan de Universiteit Leiden, waar zij onderzoek verricht in het kader van het programma Conflictoplossende Instituties.

Alison Fischer
Alison Fischer is PhD Candidate in law, focusing on post-colonial legal history.