Zoekresultaat: 101 artikelen

x
Artikel

Access_open Regelovertreding als voorspeller van incidenten in de chemische industrie

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden Compliance, Accidents, process safety, predicting, safety indicators
Auteurs Ellen Wiering, Arjan Blokland, Marieke Kluin e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Both major disasters and smaller incidents at chemical companies impact the environment. Seveso regulations aim to limit the impact of the chemical industry on man and the environment. This leads to the expectation that violation of these rules is predictive of incidents. In the current study, incidents at chemical companies are predicted from the company’s history of rule violation, previously reported incidents and corporate characteristics. Analysis of three years of inspection data and of six years of reported incidents, shows that the company’s branch and previous reported incidents predict the occurrence of an incident. The company’s history of rule violation, however, does not. Future research is needed to examine the different possible explanations for these contra intuitive results.


Ellen Wiering
Ellen Wiering is als junior onderzoeker verbonden aan de afdeling Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Arjan Blokland
Arjan Blokland is als bijzonder hoogleraar Criminology & Criminal Justice verbonden aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden en als senior onderzoeker verbonden aan het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving (NSCR).

Marieke Kluin
Marieke Kluin is als universitair docent Criminologie verbonden aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden.

Wim Huisman
Wim Huisman is als hoogleraar Criminologie verbonden aan de afdeling Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Marlijn Peeters
Marlijn Peeters is als universitair docent Criminologie verbonden aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

Empirische kennis als instrument

Tijdschrift Advocatenblad, Aflevering 3 2019
Auteurs Petra Jonkers

Petra Jonkers
Artikel

Consumentenbescherming door informatie?

Bespreking van het proefschrift van mr. C. de Jager

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Vermogensrecht, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden informatieplichten, PRIIPs-verordening, Key Information Document, beleggersbescherming, beleidstheorie
Auteurs Mr. dr. J.J.A. Braspenning
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De Jager gaat in haar proefschrift in op de ontwikkeling en werking van gestandaardiseerde informatieplichten op het gebied van beleggersbescherming. De Jager concludeert dat dergelijke informatieplichten niet in staat zijn om complexe financiële producten voor beleggers begrijpelijk en vergelijkbaar te maken.


Mr. dr. J.J.A. Braspenning
Mr. dr. J.J.A. Braspenning is advocaat bij Linssen cs Advocaten te Tilburg.
Artikel

Access_open Teaching Socio-Legal Research Methodology: Participant Observation. Special Issue on Active Learning and Teaching in Legal Education

Tijdschrift Law and Method, januari 2019
Trefwoorden Participant observation, sociolegal research, methodology, teaching
Auteurs Marc A. Simon Thomas
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The basics of how to conduct participant observation are not taught in law schools. This is striking because this methodology has become a common feature of qualitative research and could be very useful in sociolegal research. For those interested in studying ‘law in practice’ instead of ‘law in the books’, qualitative research methods like participant observation are inevitable. However, participant observation is, at best, secondary in the literature on qualitative research in the sociolegal discipline, while there is no guidance on how to conduct this technique whatsoever.Therefore, this article is written with two audiences in mind: It should serve as a useful reference and guide for those who teach qualitative research methods in legal education and who are looking to enhance their knowledge and skills concerning participant observation; it is also meant to serve as a basic primer for the beginning sociolegal researcher who is about to become a participating observer for the first time.


Marc A. Simon Thomas
Utrecht University, School of Law, Institute of Jurisprudence, Constitutional and Administrative Law, Legal Theory; m.a.simonthomas@uu.nl.
Boekbespreking

Access_open Kestemont, Handbook on Legal Methodology. A Review

(Book review of Kestemont, L. (2018). Handbook on Legal Methodology. From Objective to Method. Cambridge: Intersentia, xiii + 97 pp.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, januari 2019
Auteurs Wibren van der Burg
Auteursinformatie

Wibren van der Burg
Wibren van der Burg, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University of Rotterdam and School of Law, Queen Mary University of London.
Article

Access_open Right to Access Information as a Collective-Based Approach to the GDPR’s Right to Explanation in European Law

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden automated decision-making, right to access information, right to explanation, prohibition on discrimination, public information
Auteurs Joanna Mazur
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article presents a perspective which focuses on the right to access information as a mean to ensure a non-discriminatory character of algorithms by providing an alternative to the right to explanation implemented in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). I adopt the evidence-based assumption that automated decision-making technologies have an inherent discriminatory potential. The example of a regulatory means which to a certain extent addresses this problem is the approach based on privacy protection in regard to the right to explanation. The Articles 13-15 and 22 of the GDPR provide individual users with certain rights referring to the automated decision-making technologies. However, the right to explanation not only may have a very limited impact, but it also focuses on individuals thus overlooking potentially discriminated groups. Because of this, the article offers an alternative approach on the basis of the right to access information. It explores the possibility of using this right as a tool to receive information on the algorithms determining automated decision-making solutions. Tracking an evolution of the interpretation of Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Right and Fundamental Freedoms in the relevant case law aims to illustrate how the right to access information may become a collective-based approach towards the right to explanation. I consider both, the potential of this approach, such as its more collective character e.g. due to the unique role played by the media and NGOs in enforcing the right to access information, as well as its limitations.


Joanna Mazur
Joanna Mazur, M.A., PhD student, Faculty of Law and Administration, Uniwersytet Warszawski.

    Jurisprudence is a domain related to terms such as rules, morality, principles, equality, justice, etc. Legal scholars have to teach the meaning of these terms. However, these are not terms, one can comprehend by just reading their standard definition. These are terms one must digest and learn to use. My argument is that literature or the law and literature movement can be used as a tool in order to explain and discuss these terms. For instance, beyond simply explaining or teaching legal positivism and natural law, Antigone helps students reflect upon the distinction between them. To cite another example, reading Nana can help students think about sex-workers in a way they would never think before. Moreover, the literature can be a useful means in teaching critical movements in law, such as critical legal studies, feminist legal theory and critical race theory. Finally, the terms I stated at the beginning are not only terms of jurisprudence, they are terms we should use properly in order to construct a healthy legal environment. Therefore, to get students comprehend these terms is a crucially important aim. I argue that literature can be a tool in order to achieve this aim.


E. Irem Aki
Dr. E.I. Aki was a research assistant at Ankara University Faculty of Law until 2017; iremaki@gmail.com.
Artikel

De geschatte waarde van het preventieprogramma Brandveilig Leven op basis van de contingente waarderingsmethode (CV – Contingent Valuation)

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden willingness-to-pay, contingent valuation, impact assessment, community fire safety
Auteurs David Bornebroek, Ron de Wit, Marc van Buiten e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Dutch Regional Fire Services collectively aim at preventing fire, casualties and damage. The main activity is informing citizens about fire risks and the appropriate measures they can take. From both a political and social perspective, it is valuable to know what the return of the Community Fire Safety program is. One way to chart the return of the program is a comparison of the cost of, and society’s willingness-to-pay for, the program. To estimate this willingness-to-pay, this article applies the contingent valuation method to a national representative sample of 806 Dutch citizens. The results show that willingness-to-pay of an average Dutch household is estimated to be between € 25.00 and € 35.67 per year provided the Community Fire Safety program improves the fire safety by 10%. At the national level, this amounts to 200 – 270 million euro annually. This value is seven to ten times more than the approximate costs of the current Community Fire Safety program.


David Bornebroek
David Bornebroek is manager/directeur van Twente Safety Campus en Teamleider (Brand) Veilig Leven en projectleider Risk Factory bij Brandweer Twente.

Ron de Wit
Ron de Wit is plaatsvervangend commandant van de Brandweer Twente.

Marc van Buiten
Marc van Buiten is universitair docent aan de faculteit Engeneering Technology aan de Universiteit Twente.

Ira Helsloot
Ira Helsloot is hoogleraar Besturen van Veiligheid aan de Radboud Universiteit.
Artikel

Access_open Educating the Legal Imagination. Special Issue on Active Learning and Teaching in Legal Education

Tijdschrift Law and Method, oktober 2018
Trefwoorden imagination, artefact, active learners, metaphors
Auteurs Maksymilian Del Mar
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper presents a basic model of the imagination and offers pedagogical resources and activities for educating three related abilities to imagine. The basic model is that to imagine is to combine the process of awareness, framing and distancing, and the process of, simultaneously actively participate, by doing things with and thanks to artefacts. Artefacts, in turn, are fabricated forms (here, forms of language) that signal their own artifice and invite us to do things with them, across a spectrum of sensory, kinetic, and affective abilities. Modelled in this way, imagination plays a crucial role in legal reasoning, and is exemplified by the following kinds of artefacts in legal discourse: fictions, metaphors, hypothetical scenarios and figuration. These artefacts and their related processes of imagination are vital to legal reasoning at many levels, including the level of the individual lawyer or judge, the level of interaction in courtrooms, and the level of legal language over time. The paper offers nine learning activities corresponding to educating three abilities in the legal context: 1) to take epistemic distance and participate; 2) to generate alternatives and possibilities; and 3) to construct mental imagery.


Maksymilian Del Mar
Department of Law, Queen Mary University of London.

    This paper starts by reviewing empirical research that threatens law and economics’ initial success. This research has demonstrated that the functioning of the law cannot be well understood based on the assumption of the rational actor and that policies which are based on this assumption are likely to be flawed. Subsequently, three responses to this criticism are discussed. Whereas the first response denounces this criticism by maintaining that the limitations attributed to the rational actor can easily be incorporated in rational choice theory, the second response welcomes the criticism as an opportunity to come up with an integrative theory of law and behavior. The third response also takes the criticism seriously but replaces the aspiration to come up with such an integrative theory by a context-sensitive approach. It will be argued that the first two responses fall short while the third response offers a promising way to go forward.


Peter Mascini
Prof. dr. P. Mascini, Erasmus School of Law and Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Vergelijkende rechtscultuur en aansprakelijkheidsrecht – een verkennend experiment

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Legal culture, Civil law, Justice, Experiment, Empirical Legal Research
Auteurs Prof. dr. Willem van Boom, Dr. Chris Reinders Folmer en Dr. Pieter Desmet
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A common conception in the legal literature holds that in a given country, the law in force is to be understood against the background of shared beliefs about justice in that particular country. If that conception holds true, the applicable civil law in a particular country should reflect the shared views on ‘civil justice’ within that country and, as a result, citizens should reveal a preference for domestic civil law over the civil law of another country for a given case. In this research we empirically investigated to what extent the applicable law in particular cases corresponds to actual beliefs about what is seen as just in those situations. Does Dutch liability law in a particular case correspond with what citizens in the Netherlands consider to be just in that case? And does the applicable English liability law correspond to what English people consider fair in that case?
    In an experiment we compared Dutch and English respondents’ views on the fairness of legal solutions in three different, hypothetical cases where Dutch and English legal solutions to the same case would diverge. We find that at the aggregate level, respondents indeed reveal a preference for the legal solution that is applicable in their own country, regardless of whether the different legal solutions are presented as applicable or not: Dutch respondents prefer Dutch civil solutions and English respondents prefer English civil solutions. However, we also observe differences between cases that make strong conclusions about a structural correspondence premature.


Prof. dr. Willem van Boom
Willem van Boom is hoogleraar civiel recht aan de Leiden Law School.

Dr. Chris Reinders Folmer
Chris Reinders Folmer is postdoc rechtspsychologie aan de Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.

Dr. Pieter Desmet
Pieter Desmet is hoofddocent rechtspsychologie aan de Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Artikel

The Dual-use of Drones

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden Drones, Dual use, Responsible design, Ethiek van technologisch innovatie
Auteurs Peter Novitzky, Ben Kokkeler en Peter-Paul Verbeek
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Drones en drone-gerelateerde cybertechnologieën nemen een vlucht in het veiligheidsdomein in de vorm van toepassingen door het leger, de politie, brandweer, private beveiligingsbedrijven, en ook deurwaarders, agrariërs en burgerinitiatieven. Drones werden in eerste instantie ontwikkeld voor militaire doeleinden. Hun aanpassingsvermogen als universele platforms voor beeldregistratie en goederenvervoer leidt tot hoge verwachtingen rond toepassing in het civiele domein. Dit artikel onderzoekt de ethische aspecten van “dual use” van drones en gerelateerde technologieën. Verschillende dimensies van dual use worden verkend: de technologisch ontwikkeling, maar ook de ontwikkeling van wet- en regelgeving in Amerika en Europa. Voor het Nederlandse veiligheidsdomein is relevant dat dit artikel bijdraagt aan het signaleren van de noodzaak om de ontwikkeling en toepassing van drones in breder perspectief te bezien. Drones en hun toepassingen maken deel uit van de internationale markt van militaire organisaties en van veiligheidsorganisaties in het publieke en private domein. Bovendien maken ze veelal deel uit van geïntegreerde systemen en van wereldwijde platforms voor consumentenelektronica. Dit artikel is een van de resultaten uit het door NWO gefinancierde project 'Responsible Design of Drones and Drone Services: Towards an Ethical and Juridical Tool For Drone Design and Risk Assessment' (Project no. 313-99-318). Het project was gericht op het ontwikkelen van een instrument voor ontwikkeling en gebruik van dronetoepassingen uitgaande van methoden als Responsible Research & Innovation (RRI) en Value Sensitive Design (VSD).


Peter Novitzky
Peter Novitzky is postdoctoral researcher verbonden aan de Wageningen University. Email: peter.novitzky@wur.nl.

Ben Kokkeler
Ben Kokkeler is lector Digitalisering en Veiligheid aan Avans Hogeschool. Hij is daarnaast senior consultant bij de Europese Technopolis Group, kantoor Amsterdam, waar hij evaluaties en verkenningen uitvoert rond ehealth en smart cities. Email: bjm.kokkeler@avans.nl.

Peter-Paul Verbeek
Peter Paul Verbeek is hoogleraar Filosofie van mens en techniek aan de Universiteit Twente. Email: p.p.c.c.verbeek@utwente.nl.
Artikel

Het succes van social engineering

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden Awareness, E-mail phishing, Social Engineering, Telefoonfraude
Auteurs Jan-Willem Bullée, Lorena Montoya, Marianne Junger e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Social engineering is the usage of social manipulation and psychological tricks to make the targets assist offenders in their attack. This paper aimed to discuss the success of social engineering attacks and interventions in an organisational setting. Three kinds of social engineering experiments were discussed, each using a different modality (i.e. face-to-face (f2f), email and telephone). In each experiment, the targets (i.e. participants) were persuaded to perform actions that contribute to their victimisation.
    A portion of the participants in both the f2f and telephone experiment received an intervention to reduce victimisation. The conclusion is that awareness raising about dangers, characteristics and countermeasures related to social engineering proved to have a significant positive effect on protecting the target. The results of these experiments allow practitioners to focus awareness campaigns to maximise their effectiveness.


Jan-Willem Bullée
Jan-Willem Bullée is Information Risk Manager aan de Universiteit Twente. Email: j.h.bullee@gmail.com.

Lorena Montoya
Lorena Montoya is Graduate School Coordinator aan de Universiteit Twente. Email: a.l.montoya@utwente.nl.

Marianne Junger
Marianne Junger is professor Cyber Security and Business Continuity aan de Universiteit Twente. Email: m.junger@utwente.nl.

Pieter Hartel
Pieter Hartel is hoofd van de Cyber Security research group aan de TU Delft en werkzaam aan de Universiteit Twente. Email: pieter.hartel@tudelft.nl.
Artikel

Access_open Theoretische vernieuwing in de criminologie

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Theoretical innovation, Scientific revolutions, Power-knowledge complex, Sensitising theory, Integrative theory
Auteurs Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen en Dr. mr. Marc Schuilenburg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article starts off with an exposé of what ‘theoretical innovation’ means in the social sciences. The development of criminology is considered to be a result of (1) historical and cultural developments, (2) political-economic developments, (3) developments in other academic disciplines and (4) reactions to or specifications of other theoretical perspectives in criminology itself. Paradigm shifts in criminology are characterised by an individualistic and positivist aetiological turn in its early days; a sociological turn towards a ‘criminology of the lawmaker’ from the late 1950s on; and a return to positivism in the neoliberal and neoconservative turn of the 1990s. The new century ushers in a new epistemological break in criminology, in which globalisation, global warming, migration, human rights and the implications of cyberspace ‘force’ criminologists to overcome their anthropocentric and colonial character biases.


Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen
Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen is hoogleraar criminologie en voorzitter van de sectie criminologie van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. E-mail: vanswaaningen@law.eur.nl.

Dr. mr. Marc Schuilenburg
Dr. mr. Marc Schuilenburg is universitair docent Strafrecht en Criminologie aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. E-mail: m.b.schuilenburg@vu.nl.

    The judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case of Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname is noteworthy for a number of reasons. Particularly important is the Court’s repeated citation and incorporation of various provisions of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into its interpretation of the American Convention on Human Rights. This aids in greater understanding of the normative value of the Declaration’s provisions, particularly when coupled with the dramatic increase in affirmations of that instrument by UN treaty bodies, Special Procedures and others. The Court’s analysis also adds detail and further content to the bare architecture of the Declaration’s general principles and further contributes to the crystallisation of the discrete, although still evolving, body of law upholding indigenous peoples’ rights. Uptake of the Court’s jurisprudence by domestic tribunals further contributes to this state of dynamic interplay between sources and different fields of law.


Fergus MacKay JD
Diversen

‘Hoe zou u het bewijsrecht willen moderniseren?’

Verslag van de najaarsvergadering 2017 van de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Procesrecht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Civiele Rechtspleging, Aflevering 2 2018
Auteurs Mr. J.J. Dammingh en Mr. L.M. van den Berg
Auteursinformatie

Mr. J.J. Dammingh
Mr. J.J. Dammingh is universitair hoofddocent burgerlijk (proces)recht aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Mr. L.M. van den Berg
Mr. L.M. van den Berg is stafjurist in de Rechtbank Gelderland en tevens verbonden aan de sectie burgerlijk (proces)recht van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
Article

Access_open The Questionable Legitimacy of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden base erosion and profit shifting, OECD, G20, legitimacy, international tax reform
Auteurs Sissie Fung
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The global financial crisis of 2008 and the following public uproar over offshore tax evasion and corporate aggressive tax planning scandals gave rise to unprecedented international cooperation on tax information exchange and coordination on corporate tax reforms. At the behest of the G20, the OECD developed a comprehensive package of ‘consensus-based’ policy reform measures aimed to curb base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) by multinationals and to restore fairness and coherence to the international tax system. The legitimacy of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project, however, has been widely challenged. This paper explores the validity of the legitimacy concerns raised by the various stakeholders regarding the OECD/G20 BEPS Project.


Sissie Fung
Ph.D. Candidate at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and independent tax policy consultant to international organisations, including the Asian Development Bank.
Praktijk

Wat gebeurt er op de gang? Een kwalitatief empirisch onderzoek naar schikkingsonderhandelingen tijdens civielrechtelijke procedures

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden Settlement negotiations, Distributive negotiations, Qualitative empirical research, Biases, Heuristics
Auteurs Mr. Lucas Lieverse
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    There is little known on settlement negotiations during civil lawsuits in the Netherlands. Settlement negotiations take place during a (suspension of the) public court hearing. The public hearing takes place in the majority of the civil lawsuits in the Netherlands. The qualitative empirical research I am carrying out, intents to give insight in these settlement negotiations and questions what lawyers actually do during these negotiations. The research intents to contribute to the effectiveness of settlement negotiations in the sense that (i) the number of settlements increases and of compulsory settlements decreases, (ii) the perceived fairness of procedure and outcome in settled cases increases, and (iii) the number of resolved underlying conflicts increases.
    I expect to find that most settlement negotiations can be qualified as distributive negotiations (as opposed to integrative negotiations). Furthermore, based on a literature review on biases and heuristics I hypothesized that settlement could be more effective than they actually are. The paper touches on the methodology and on both hypotheses.


Mr. Lucas Lieverse
Lucas Lieverse is docent en onderzoeker bij Zuyd Hogeschool en voor zijn PhD-onderzoek als buitenpromovendus verbonden aan het Montaigne Centrum voor Rechtspleging en Conflictoplossing van de Universiteit Utrecht. Hij heeft als gewezen advocaat ervaring met en is geïnteresseerd in civiel (proces)recht en (juridische) conflictoplossing, waarbij hij inzichten uit verschillende disciplines verbindt.

    This paper discusses three approaches that can be helpful in the area of comparative rights jurisprudence, oriented in reference to three different kinds of studies that are possible in that area. To a large extent the methods for a comparative legal research depend on the research question and the goal of the researcher. First, a comparative law study may focus on the sociocultural context that led to the elaboration of differences or similarities in the protection of rights. Second, a comparative law approach can be a normative enterprise. It can focus on engaging in a philosophical analysis enlightened by the differences or similarities in the regulation of rights, in order to propose concrete solutions for the regulation of a right. Third, a comparative law approach can combine both elements of the two previously mentioned approaches. The paper discusses the challenges that the researcher faces in her attempt to use these methodologies and how these challenges can be overcome. The law as a normative discipline has its own constraints of justifiability. If what motivates a comparative law study is the search for principles of justice the researcher needs to persuade that her methodological approach serves her aim.


Ioanna Tourkochoriti
School of Law, NUI Galway, Ireland.

    Comparative methodology is an important and a widely used method in the legal literature. This method is important inter alia to search for alternative national rules and acquire a deeper understanding of a country’s law. According to a survey of over 500 Dutch legal scholars, 61 per cent conducts comparative research (in some form). However, the methodological application of comparative research generally leaves much to be desired. This is particularly true when it comes to case selection. This applies in particular to conceptual and dogmatic research questions, possibly also allowing causal explanations for differences between countries. This article suggests that the use of an interdisciplinary research design could be helpful, and Hofstede’s cultural-psychological dimensions can offer a solution to improve the methodology of selection criteria.


Dave van Toor
D.A.G. van Toor, PhD LLM BSc works as a researcher and lecturer in Criminal (Procedural) Law and Criminology at the Universität Bielefeld.
Toont 21 - 40 van 101 gevonden teksten
« 1 2 4 5 6
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.