Verfijn uw zoekresultaat

Zoekresultaat: 406 artikelen

x
Artikel

Overvragende wetgever zet gezagsuitoefening van rechter onder druk

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden judiciary, legislature, legitimacy, overburdening
Auteurs Meike Bokhorst
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    During the recent Senate debate about the constitutional state some senators expressed a concern about the tensions between the legislature and judiciary. The problems of overburdening, underfunding and instrumentalisation of the judiciary have a long history. The legislature has a tendency to overburden himself and the other powers of state, like the judiciary, notwithstanding the official policy to be reserved with regard to the responsibilities of government. The judiciary must adapt itself to an ever more prominent role in the constitutional state. The judiciary also has to generate its own legitimacy and cannot consider this to be a function of the legitimacy basis of the democratic legislator. The legislator for his part has all kinds of democratic wishes and expectations on how the judiciary can increase its own legitimacy basis by dealing quicker with more cases. In this context, the minister strongly adheres to the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied. The working methods of the judiciary have shown small and gradual steps in the direction of a more responsive and communicative procedure. However, the judiciary is not able to transform all its ideas into concrete initiatives and to transform successful initiatives into settled practices.


Meike Bokhorst
Meike Bokhorst is wetenschappelijk medewerker bij de Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid in Den Haag. Onlangs promoveerde zij in Tilburg op het proefschrift ‘Bronnen van legitimiteit. Over de zoektocht van de wetgever naar zeggenschap en gezag.’ Hiervoor werkte ze als onderzoeker bij de Algemene Rekenkamer en als beleidsmedewerker bij het Ministerie van Justitie. Ze studeerde filosofie met journalistiek aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en politicologie aan de Universiteit Leiden.

Juan M. Amaya-Castro
Juan M. Amaya-Castro is Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law of the VU University of Amsterdam. He is affiliated with the Migration and Diversity Centre.
Artikel

Access_open Wat is juridisch interactionisme?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden interactionism, Lon Fuller, interactional law, legal pluralism, concept of law
Auteurs Wibren van der Burg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Two phenomena that challenge theories of law in the beginning of the twenty-first century are the regulatory explosion and the emergence of horizontal and interactional forms of law. In this paper, I develop a theory that can address these two phenomena, namely legal interactionism, a theory inspired by the work of Fuller and Selznick. In a pluralist approach, legal interactionism recognizes both interactional law and enacted law, as well as other sources such as contract. We should aim for a pluralistic and gradual concept of law. Because of this pluralist and gradual character, legal interactionism can also do justice to global legal pluralism and to the dynamic intertwinement of health law and bioethics.


Wibren van der Burg
Wibren van der Burg is Professor of Legal Philosophy and Jurisprudence, Erasmus School of Law at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Racial Profiling and the Presumption of Innocence

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden racial profiling, stop-and-frisk, presumption of innocence, communicative theories of criminal law, social inequality and criminal law
Auteurs Peter DeAngelis
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    I argue that a compelling way to articulate what is wrong with racial profiling in policing is to view racial profiling as a violation of the presumption of innocence. I discuss the communicative nature of the presumption of innocence as an expression of social trust and a protection against the social condemnation of being undeservingly investigated, prosecuted, and convicted for committing a crime. I argue that, given its communicative dimension, failures to extend the presumption of innocence are an expression of disrespect. I take the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk policy as an example of racial profiling and argue that its use of race-based forms of suspicion as reasons for making stops is a violation of the presumption of innocence. I maintain that this systemic failure to extend the presumption of innocence to profiled groups reveals the essentially disrespectful nature of the NYPD policy.


Peter DeAngelis
Peter DeAngelis is Ph.D. Candidate in Philosophy at Villanova University.
Artikel

Access_open The Right to Have Rights as the Right to Asylum

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden Arendt, asylum, refugeeship, right to have rights, statelessness de facto and de jure
Auteurs Nanda Oudejans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article argues that the right to have rights, as launched by Hannah Arendt, is relative to refugee displacement and hence translates as a right to asylum. It takes issue with the dominant view that the public/private divide is the locus classicus of the meaning of this primordial right. A different direction of thought is proposed, proceeding from Arendt’s recovery of the spatiality of law. The unencompassibility of place in matters of rights, freedom and equality brings this right into view as a claim at the behest of those who have lost a legal place of their own. This also helps us to gain better understanding of Arendt’s rebuttal of the sharp-edged distinction between refugees and stateless persons and to discover the defiant potential of the right to have rights to illuminate the refugee’s claim to asylum as a claim to an own place where protection can be enjoyed again.


Nanda Oudejans
Nanda Oudejans is an independent researcher in philosophy of law and political philosophy.

    On the one hand, the religiously motivated circumcision of male minors is a manifestation of the right to freedom of religion. On the other hand, circumcision is an interference with the right to physical integrity. This article makes an effort to explain the fundamental rights’ position of male minor circumcision, dealing as well with the right to freedom of religion of the male minor, with some medical aspects, and with the difference between the circumcision of boys and girls. The article results in a discussion of the question, if specific regulation is required, in view of the recent discussion about the legitimacy of circumcision of male minors.


Aernout Nieuwenhuis
Mr. dr. A.J. Nieuwenhuis is universitair hoofddocent Staatsrecht aan de faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. A.J.Nieuwenhuis@uva.nl.
Artikel

To resist = to create? Some thoughts on the concept of resistance in cultural criminology

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden resistance, create, revolution, cultural criminology, transformation
Auteurs Dr. Keith Hayward en Dr. mr. Marc Schuilenburg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article provides a theoretical analysis of the label ‘resistance’. It sets out from the premise that the notion of resistance, although it has been current in criminology for some time, is still vaguely defined. We argue that resistance is not just a negative term, but can also be seen as a positive and creative force in society. As such, the primary function of resistance is to serve as a solvent of doxa, to continuously question obviousness and common sense. In the process of resistance we distinguish three processes: invention, imitation and transformation. The third stage warrants deeper investigation within cultural criminology.


Dr. Keith Hayward
Dr. Keith Hayward is hoogleraar criminologie aan de School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent (UK). E-mail: k.j.hayward@kent.ac.uk

Dr. mr. Marc Schuilenburg
Dr. mr. Marc Schuilenburg is als universitair docent verbonden aan de sectie Criminologie van de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam. E-mail: m.b.schuilenburg@vu.nl
Artikel

Dutch influence on the reform of the Macedonian system of civil enforcement

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Civiele Rechtspleging, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden bailiffs, civil enforcement, direct enforcement, dejudicialization
Auteurs Prof. dr. T. Zoroska-Kamilovska
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Macedonian system of civil enforcement has long been construed as a reflection of the principle of “re-adjudication upon the original request for legal protection”. The worryingly low execution rate and the excessive length of the enforcement procedure have imposed the necessity of urgent “restructuring” of the entirety of the enforcement system, and the Dutch model has served as an excellent role-model. This article provides a short overview of the characteristic features of the Macedonian enforcement system, and the degree to which they correspond to the Dutch model of civil enforcement.


Prof. dr. T. Zoroska-Kamilovska
Prof. Dr T. Zoroska-Kamilovska is Associate Professor of Civil Procedural Law at the Faculty of Law ‘Iustinianus Primus’, Ss. Cyril and Methodius State University in Skopje, of the Republic of Macedonia.
Artikel

‘Staring at the felony forest’

De complexiteit van risicoprofilering nader in kaart gebracht

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden profileren, discretionaire bevoegdheden, etniciteit, selectie
Auteurs Tim Dekkers MSc en Mr. dr. Maartje van der Woude
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, the debate around police profiling has been rather low key – until recently. Now it has turned into a heated discussion with a clear focus on ethnic profiling. This extensive international literature review aims to show that there is more to profiling than just ethnicity. Factors such as behavior and the vehicle someone is driving can be just as important as a person’s looks. The results of this study put profiling in perspective and level the playing field of the debate, in which the side of the organizations using profiling has not gotten enough attention until now.


Tim Dekkers MSc
Tim Dekkers MSc is junior onderzoeker bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden.

Mr. dr. Maartje van der Woude
Mr. dr. Maartje van der Woude ishoofddocent Straf- en strafprocesrecht aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie te Leiden. Zij is tevens redactielid van PROCES.

    This article discusses the possibility spouses have under the Rome III Regulation (EC Regulation 1259/2010) to choose the law applicable to their divorce. It discusses the limits and exceptions of this freedom to choose.


Dr. Thalia Kruger
Thalia Kruger is professor at the law faculty of the University of Antwerp, where she teaches and researches private international law, international civil procedure and international family law. She is also Honorary Research Associate at the University of Cape Town.
Artikel

Access_open Skeptical Legal Education

How to Develop a Critical Attitude?

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2013
Trefwoorden academic learning, skepticism, Oakeshott, judgment, Critique
Auteurs Bart van Klink en Bald de Vries
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Law teachers at the university want students to develop a critical attitude. But what exactly does it mean to be critical and why is it important to be critical? How can a critical attitude be promoted? In this article we intend to elucidate the role that critical thinking may play in legal education. We will introduce the idea of skeptical legal education, which is to a large extent based on Michael Oakeshott’s understanding of liberal learning but which relativizes its insistence on the non-instrumentality of learning and reinforces its critical potential. Subsequently, the article presents a teaching experiment, where students, based on self-organization, study and discuss basic texts in order to encourage critical thinking.


Bart van Klink
Bart van Klink is professor of Legal Methodology at VU University Amsterdam and head of the Department of Legal Theory and Legal History at VU University Amsterdam.

Bald de Vries
Ulbaldus de Vries is lecturer of Legal Theory at the Department of administrative and constitutional law and jurisprudence at the Faculty of law, Utrecht University. He is a founding-member of the Working Group on Reflexive Modernisation and Law.
Artikel

Access_open ‘Civiel totalitarisme’, volkssoevereiniteit en de wenselijkheid van beperkt bestuur

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden liberale democratie, waardenpluralisme, confuciaanse democratie, christelijke bronnen
Auteurs Hans-Martien ten Napel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    To what extent does liberal democracy still manage to realize the principle of expressive liberty? This article argues that, just as by the ethically monistic character of certain theoretizations of Confucian democracy, expressive liberty is threatened by a Western ‘civic totalism’ that insists that ‘politics enjoys general authority over subordinate activities and institutions because it aims at the highest and most comprehensive good for human beings’ (Galston). The ideal of liberal democracy will remain fundamentally flawed, as long as the sovereignty of the people on which its political legitimacy is more and more exclusively based hinders instead of advances a true sort of value pluralism.


Hans-Martien ten Napel
Mr. dr. H.-M.Th.D. ten Napel is als universitair hoofddocent verbonden aan de afdeling Staats- en Bestuursrecht van de Universiteit Leiden. h.m.t.d.tennapel@law.leidenuniv.nl.
Artikel

Geen woorden maar daden

De invloed van legitimiteit en vertrouwen op het nalevingsgedrag van verkeersovertreders

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden perceptions of legitimacy, Compliance, procedural justice
Auteurs Marc Hertogh, Bert Schudde en Heinrich Winter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    For many years, most regulatory research focused on instrumental motivations for compliance, which emphasize the role of rewards and punishments related to (dis)obeying the law. However, more recent studies have also emphasized the potential role of normative motivations. Using survey data collected from a sample of 1,182 traffic offenders in the Netherlands, and building on the ‘procedural justice model’ which was first developed in Why People Obey the Law (Tyler 1990), this paper explores how perceptions of legitimacy shape regulatory compliance. The study makes three contributions to the literature. First, this study is one of the few studies in which the procedural justice model is tested in Continental Europe. Second, following recent critiques in the literature, the paper introduces three modifications to the original model. Third, and unlike most previous studies, this study is not entirely based on self-reporting by drivers, but includes actual evidence about their behavior as well. With regard to the self-reported level of compliance, our study largely confirms Tyler’s (1990) original findings. Yet with regard to the observed level of compliance, there are also important differences between both studies. These findings will be explained by shifting our focus of attention from Tyler’s ‘universalistic’ approach to ‘legitimacy-in-context’ (Beetham 1991).


Marc Hertogh
Marc Hertogh is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Centrale thema’s in zijn onderzoek zijn de maatschappelijke effecten van wetgeving, de maatschappelijke beleving van recht en rechtsstaat, en de legitimiteit van het overheidsoptreden. Recente publicaties: Scheidende machten: de relatiecrisis tussen politiek en rechtspraak (Boom Juridische uitgevers 2012) en (met Heleen Weyers) Recht van onderop: antwoorden uit de rechtssociologie (Ars Aequi Libri 2011).

Bert Schudde
Bert Schudde studeerde sociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en is werkzaam als onderzoeker bij Pro Facto. Hij heeft brede onderzoekservaring in toegepast beleids- en evaluatieonderzoek, grootschalig surveyonderzoek en kwantitatieve analyse.

Heinrich Winter
Heinrich Winter is directeur van Pro Facto, bureau voor bestuurskundig en juridisch onderzoek, onderwijs en advies. Daarnaast is hij in Groningen bijzonder hoogleraar Toezicht. Hij is veelvuldig betrokken bij wetsevaluaties, waarover hij ook publiceert. Recente publicaties over toezicht zijn ‘Waar blijft het interbestuurlijk toezicht?’, in: Publicaties van de Staatsrechtkring nr. 16 (Wolf Legal Publishers 2012) en ‘Meten van de effecten van toezicht. Yes we can?’, Tijdschrift voor Toezicht 2012/2, p. 63-80. In 2013 schreef hij met Bert Marseille de handleiding Professioneel behandelen van bezwaarschriften voor BZK/Prettig contact met de overheid.
Article

Access_open From Legal Pluralism to Public Justification

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden legal pluralism, diversity and law, law and justification, concept of law
Auteurs Dr. Emmanuel Melissaris
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The paper offers an argument for a conception of legal pluralism, which has some substantive upshots and at least partly alleviates that legal pluralism may regress to rampant relativism. In particular, I will argue that law in its pluralist conception is inextricably linked to the requirement of public justification. This is not by way of appealing to any transcendental normative ideals but as a matter of entailment of the very practice of law. But, perhaps to the disappointment of many, this procedural requirement is the only practical consequence of the concept of law. For thicker, substantive limits to what law can do and for ways in which legal pluralism may be reduced in real contexts one will have to turn to the actual circumstances furnishing the law with content and a different kind of thinking about the law.


Dr. Emmanuel Melissaris
Associate Professor of Law, Law Department, London School of Economics and Political Science. I am grateful to Sanne Taekema and Wibo van Rossum as well as the two anonymous referees for their helpful critical comments. A version of this paper was presented at the School of Law, Queen Mary University of London. I am indebted to all the participants in that seminar and particularly to Roger Cotterrell, Ann Mumford, Maskymilian del Mar, Prakash Shah, Valsamis Mitsilegas, Wayne Morrison, Michael Lobban, Richard Nobles and David Schiff. Many thanks also to Sean Coyle, George Pavlakos, Alexis Galan Avila and Mariano Croce for their valuable comments on earlier drafts of the paper. I am solely responsible for all remaining errors.
Article

Access_open A Turn to Legal Pluralism in Rule of Law Promotion?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden legal pluralism, rule of law promotion, legal reform, customary law, non-state legal systems, donor policy
Auteurs Dr.mr Ronald Janse
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the past 25 years, international organizations, NGOs and (mostly Western) states have spent considerable energy and resources on strengthening and reforming legal systems in developing countries. The results of these efforts have generally been disappointing, despite occasional successes. Among donors, one of most popular explanations of this failure in recent years is that rule of law promotion has wrongly focused almost exclusively on strengthening the formal legal system. Donors have therefore decided to 'engage' with informal justice systems. The turn to legal plu‍ra‍lism is to be welcomed for various reasons. But it is also surprising and worrisome. It is surprising because legal pluralism in developing countries was a fact of life before rule of law promotion began. What made donors pursuing legal reform blind to this reality for so long? It is worrisome because it is not self-evident that the factors which have contributed to such cognitive blindness have disappeared overnight. Are donors really ready to refocus their efforts on legal pluralism and 'engage' with informal justice systems? This paper, which is based on a review of the literature on donor engamenet with legal pluralism in so-called conflict affected and fragile states, is about these questions. It argues that 7 factors have been responsible for donor blindness regarding legal pluralism. It questions whether these factors have been addressed.


Dr.mr Ronald Janse
Ronald Janse is Associate Professor of Law, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Article

Access_open At the Crossroads of National and European Union Law. Experiences of National Judges in a Multi-level Legal Order

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden national judges, legal pluralism, application of EU law, legal consciousness, supremacy and direct effect of EU law
Auteurs Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The notion and theory of legal pluralism have been witnessing an increasing interest on part of scholars. The theory that originates from the legal anthropological studies and is one of the major topical streams in the realm of socio-legal studies slowly but steady started to become a point of departure for other disciplines. Unavoidably it has also gained attention from the scholars in the realm of the law of the European Union. It is the aim of the present article to illustrate the legal reality in which the law of the Union and the national laws coexist and intertwine with each other and, subsequently, to provide some insight on the manner national judges personally construct their own understanding of this complex legal architecture and the problems they come across in that respect. In that sense, the present article not only illustrates the new, pluralistic legal environment that came into being with the founding of the Communities, later the European Union, but also adds another dimension to this by presenting selected, empirical data on how national judges in several Member States of the EU individually perceive, adapt to, experience and make sense of this reality of overlapping and intertwining legal orders. Thus, the principal aim of this article is to illustrate how the pluralistic legal system works in the mind of a national judge and to capture the more day-to-day legal reality by showing how the law works on the ground through the lived experiences of national judges.


Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
Urszula Jaremba, PhD, assistant professor at the Department of European Union Law, School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. I am grateful to the editors of this Special Issue: Prof. Dr. Sanne Taekema and Dr. Wibo van Rossum as well as to the two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments. I am also indebted to Dr. Tobias Nowak for giving me his consent to use the data concerning the Dutch and German judges in this article. This article is mostly based on a doctoral research project that resulted in a doctoral manuscript titled ‘Polish Civil Judges as European Union Law Judges: Knowledge, Experiences and Attitudes’, defended on the 5th of October 2012.
Artikel

Access_open There is Only One Presumption of Innocence

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden burden of proof, German law, procedural rights, pretrial detention
Auteurs Thomas Weigend
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Antony Duff proposes a comprehensive concept of the presumption of innocence, covering the period before, during and after a criminal process, both in an official (state vs. individual) and a non-official, civic sense. By that broad usage, the concept of presumption of innocence is getting blurred and risks losing its contours. I therefore suggest to keep separate matters separate. The presumption of innocence in the narrow sense that I suggest applies only where there exists a suspicion that an individual has committed a criminal offence. The important function of the presumption of innocence in that situation is to prevent an over-extension of state power against the individual under suspicion before that suspicion has been confirmed to be true beyond a reasonable doubt. A general presumption that all people abide by the law at all times is neither warranted nor necessary. It is not warranted because experience tells us that many people break some laws sometimes. And it is not necessary because a system of civil liberties is sufficient to protect us against official or social overreach based on a suspicion that we may commit crimes.


Thomas Weigend
Thomas Weigend is Professor of Criminal Law at the University of Cologne.
Article

Access_open An Eclectic Approach to Loyalty-Promoting Instruments in Corporate Law: Revisiting Hirschman's Model of Exit, Voice, and Loyalty

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Eclecticism, corporate law & economics, corporate constitutionalism, loyalty-promoting instruments
Auteurs Bart Bootsma MSc LLM
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This essay analyses the shareholder role in corporate governance in terms of Albert Hirschman's Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. The term 'exit' is embedded in a law & economics framework, while 'voice' relates to a corporate constitutional framework. The essay takes an eclectic approach and argues that, in order to understand the shareholder role in its full breadth and depth, the corporate law & economics framework can 'share the analytical stage' with a corporate constitutional framework. It is argued that Hirschman's concept of 'loyalty' is the connecting link between the corporate law & economics and corporate constitutional framework. Corporate law is perceived as a Janus head, as it is influenced by corporate law & economics as well as by corporate constitutional considerations. In the discussion on the shareholder role in public corporations, it is debated whether corporate law should facilitate loyalty-promoting instruments, such as loyalty dividend and loyalty warrants. In this essay, these instruments are analysed based on the eclectic approach. It is argued that loyalty dividend and warrants are law & economics instruments (i.e. financial incentives) based on corporate constitutional motives (i.e. promoting loyalty in order to change the exit/voice mix in favour of voice).


Bart Bootsma MSc LLM
PhD candidate in the corporate law department at Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Email: bootsma@law.eur.nl. The research for this article has been supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) in the Open Competition in the Social Sciences 2010. The author is grateful to Ellen Hey, Klaus Heine, Michael Faure, Matthijs de Jongh and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions. The usual disclaimer applies.
Article

Access_open Human Rights Courts Interpreting Sustainable Development: Balancing Individual Rights and the Collective Interest

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Operationalizing sustainable development, human rights, individual rights/interests, collective rights/interests, human rights courts
Auteurs Emelie Folkesson MA
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article uses a generally accepted conceptualisation of sustainable development that can be operationalized in a judicial context. It focuses on the individual and collective dimensions of the environmental, economic and social pillars, as well as the consideration of inter-generational and intra-generational equity. Case law from the European, African and American systems is analysed to reveal if the elements of sustainable development have been incorporated in their jurisprudence. The analysis reveals that the human rights bodies have used different interpretative methods, some more progressive than others, in order to incorporate the elements of sustainable development in the scope of their mandate, even if they do not mention the concept as such. The overall conclusion is that sustainable development has been operationalized through human rights courts to a certain extent. Sometimes, however, a purely individualised approach to human rights creates a hurdle to further advance sustainable development. The conclusion creates the impression that sustainable development is not just a concept on paper, but that it in fact can be operationalized, also in other courts and quasi-courts. Moreover, it shows that the institutional structure of human rights courts has been used in other areas than pure human rights protection, which means that other areas of law might make use of it to fill the gap of a non-existing court structure.


Emelie Folkesson MA
PhD Candidate in public international law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. The author would like to thank Prof. Ellen Hey, Prof. Klaus Heine and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable insights and constructive comments on the drafts of this article. The usual disclaimer applies.
Artikel

Actieve rechtvaardigheid

Herstelrecht als vruchtbare bodem voor de uitoefening van burgerschap

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 3 2013
Auteurs Brunilda Pali
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article reflects on the conceptual work undertaken during the first year of ALTERNATIVE, a project coordinated by KU Leuven. The overall objective of the project is to provide an alternative and deepened understanding of justice and security based on empirical evidence of how to handle conflicts within intercultural contexts, mainly through the active participation of citizens. The paper focuses mainly on the relation of the concept of citizenship with restorative justice, especially as viewed and enacted in the four intercultural settings of the ALTERNATIVE project. Several issues are discussed: the concept of participatory citizenship in relation to crime and conflict; the claim of the discourse of restorative justice to the concept of participatory citizenship and democracy and the challenges in the restorative justice discourse that complicate its relationship to participatory citizenship. Next, insight is provided in the ways the ALTERNATIVE project tries to tackle some of these challenges, by exploring and strengthening the relationship between the concept of active citizenship and justice in Europe. By targeting the intercultural field the ALTERNATIVE aims to explore the potential of mediation services and restorative justice models to engage with macro societal conflicts that are not referred to these services by the criminal justice system, and on the other hand expand the way some of the crimes referred by the criminal justice system are handled by the mediation services alternatively by fostering alliances with various civil society organisations. Employing ‘action research’ methodology, it is argued that the concept and framework of ‘nodal governance’ (Shearing and Wood, 2003) can serve to support participatory modes of conflict regulation. Interactive settings are created, which allow for spaces between informal and formal justice, and between justice mechanisms at the individual and at the societal level (Aertsen, 2001, 2008). Arguments are provided in support of the need to promote broader models of restorative justice which are able to address social and systemic crimes and conflicts, and which will help the theory and practice of RJ to move beyond the individualisation of crime and its remedies.


Brunilda Pali
Brunilda Pali is onderzoekster aan het Criminologisch Instituut, KU Leuven (LINC). Daar werkt zij aan een proefschrift over ethiek en herstelrecht, als onderdeel van het onderzoek verricht binnen het ALTERNATIVE-project.
Toont 241 - 260 van 406 gevonden teksten
1 2 9 10 11 13 15 16 17 20 21
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.