Zoekresultaat: 18 artikelen

x
Artikel

Access_open De Vlaamse inbreng in de VWR

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden rechtstheorie, rechtsfilosofie, universitair beleid, Vlaanderen, professionalisering
Auteurs Mark Van Hoecke
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Na een beperkte Vlaamse participatie tussen 1935 en 1970, kwam er een geleidelijke verankering van de VWR in Vlaanderen, met een grote bloei in de jaren tachtig en negentig, met jonge professoren die voltijds actief waren op het gebied van de rechtsfilosofie en/of de rechtstheorie. Na 2000 vermindert de inbreng van Vlaanderen echter in belangrijke mate. Er wordt nog vrij veel gepubliceerd in R&R/NJLP, maar nauwelijks nog door professionele rechtsfilosofen of rechtstheoretici. Institutioneel wordt de internationale (Engelstalige) dimensie van de VWR versterkt (redactieraad, sprekers), maar vermindert de Vlaamse aanwezigheid in redactie, redactieraad en bestuur. De Vlaamse aanwezigheden op VWR-vergaderingen zijn vaak eenmalig en steeds minder van professionele rechtsfilosofen of rechtstheoretici. De afbouw van de leerstoelen en zelfs van het onderwijs in deze domeinen in Vlaanderen is de belangrijkste verklaring hiervoor.


Mark Van Hoecke
Mark Van Hoecke is hoogleraar Rechtsvergelijking aan de Queen Mary University of London.
Artikel

Access_open Over verplichte excuses en spreekrecht

Wat is er mis met empirisch-juridisch onderzoek naar slachtoffers?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden empirical legal studies, apologies, procedural justice, humiliation, victim rights
Auteurs Vincent Geeraets en Wouter Veraart
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The central question in this article is whether an empirical-legal approach of victimhood and victim rights could offer a sufficient basis for proposals of legal reform of the legal system. In this article, we choose a normative-critical approach and raise some objections to the way in which part of such research is currently taking place in the Netherlands, on the basis of two examples of research in this field, one dealing with compelled apologies as a possible remedy within civil procedural law and the other with the victim’s right to be heard within the criminal legal procedure. In both cases, we argue, the strong focus on the measurable needs of victims can lead to a relatively instrumental view of the legal system. The legal system must then increasingly be tailored to the wishes and needs of victims. Within this legal-empirical, victim-oriented approach, there is little regard for the general normative principles of our present legal system, in which an equal and respectful treatment of each human being as a free and responsible legal subject is a central value. We argue that results of empirical-legal research should not too easily or too quickly be translated into proposals for legal reform, but first become part of a hermeneutical discussion about norms and legal principles, specific to the normative quality of legal science itself.


Vincent Geeraets
Vincent Geeraets is universitair docent aan de afdeling Rechtstheorie en rechtsgeschiedenis van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Wouter Veraart
Wouter Veraart is hoogleraar rechtsfilosofie aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Artikel

Criminaliteitsconcentraties en microplaatsen

Een toets van de ‘law of crime concentration at places’

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden law of crime concentration, micro places, crime concentrations, criminology of place
Auteurs Prof. dr. Wim Hardyns, Thom Snaphaan MSc. en Prof. dr. Lieven J.R. Pauwels
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The spatial concentrations of crime are increasingly being studied in smaller units of analysis. This study examines the extent to which crime levels occur at micro places. Weisburd argues there is a law of crime concentration at micro places. His so-called ‘law of crime concentration at places’ states that within an urban context a limited bandwidth of micro places is associated with a specific cumulative proportion of crime (e.g. 25 or 50 percent of crime in a city). In this study the authors investigate Weisburd’s statement in regard to crime concentrations in two large Belgian cities. Official police crime statistics (PCS) for the period 2004-2012 were used. There are several ways to define and operationalize a micro place. Therefore, this study also examines whether the unit of analysis has implications for the concentration of crime at places. Analyses were conducted at two small levels, namely: grid level (using 200 meters by 200 meters grid cells) and the level of the statistical sector (more or less similar to four digit postcode areas or CBS-neighborhoods). This study shows that the concentrations of crime at grid cells are in line with the findings of Weisburd. This trend is consistent in time, for the types of crime as well as for the two cities involved. The concentrations of crime at the level of the statistical sector appear to be less strong and therefore are not in line with the law of crime concentration at places.


Prof. dr. Wim Hardyns
Prof. dr. W. Hardyns is professor aan de Vakgroep Criminologie, Strafrecht en Sociaal Recht van de Universiteit Gent. Als lid van het Institute for International Research on Criminal Policy (IRCP) bestudeert hij de ruimtelijke context van criminele fenomenen en is hij gespecialiseerd in big data toepassingen in het veiligheidsdomein.

Thom Snaphaan MSc.
J.A.J.M. Snaphaan, Msc behaalde zijn diploma van Master in de Veiligheidswetenschappen aan de Universiteit Antwerpen.

Prof. dr. Lieven J.R. Pauwels
Prof. dr. L.J.R. Pauwels is professor aan de Vakgroep Criminologie, Strafrecht en Sociaal Recht van de Universiteit Gent en co-directeur van het Institute for International Research on Criminal Policy (IRCP).
Artikel

Access_open Belgium and Democratic Constitution-Making: Prospects for the Future?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden constitutional change, democracy, participation, Belgium
Auteurs Ronald Van Crombrugge
Samenvatting

    How constitutions are changed – and more importantly: how they should be changed – is the subject of ongoing debate. There seems to be a growing consensus, however, that in order for a constitution to be considered legitimate it is required that it was created through a democratic process. This growing consensus stands in sharp contrast with the Belgian experience of constitutional change as an essentially elite-led process that takes place behind closed doors. This article seeks to explore the possibilities for more democratic forms of constitutional change in Belgium. It does so by evaluating and comparing two examples of democratic constitution-making, namely the constitution-making processes In South Africa (1996) and Iceland (2012). On the basis of these two examples, several concrete suggestions will be made, which are not only relevant for the Belgian case but can be applied more broadly to other countries as well.


Ronald Van Crombrugge
Artikel

Access_open E pluribus unum? The Manifold Meanings of Sovereignty

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden political sovereignty, power, legislative sovereignty, constitutive power, external sovereignty
Auteurs Raf Geenens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article investigates and classifies the different meanings of the term sovereignty. What exactly do we try to convey when using the words “sovereign” or “sovereignty”? I will argue that, when saying that X is sovereign, we can mean five different things: it can mean that X holds the capacity to force everyone into obedience, that X makes the laws, that the legal and political order is created by X, that X holds the competence to alter the basic norms of our legal and political order, or that X is independently active on the international stage. These different usages of the term are of course related, but they are distinct and cannot be fully reduced to one another.


Raf Geenens
Raf Geenens is an assistant professor of Ethics and Legal Philosophy at the Institute of Philosophy, University of Leuven.
Artikel

Access_open National Identity, Constitutional Identity, and Sovereignty in the EU

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden national identity, constitutional identity, EU law, constitutional courts, Court of Justice
Auteurs Elke Cloots
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article challenges the assumption, widespread in European constitutional discourse, that ‘national identity’ and ‘constitutional identity’ can be used interchangeably. First, this essay demonstrates that the conflation of the two terms lacks grounding in a sound theory of legal interpretation. Second, it submits that the requirements of respect for national and constitutional identity, as articulated in the EU Treaty and in the case law of certain constitutional courts, respectively, rest on different normative foundations: fundamental principles of political morality versus a claim to State sovereignty. Third, it is argued that the Treaty-makers had good reasons for writing into the EU Treaty a requirement of respect for the Member States’ national identities rather than the States’ sovereignty, or their constitutional identity.


Elke Cloots
Elke Cloots is post-doctoral researcher at the Centre for Government and Law, University of Hasselt.
Redactioneel

Access_open Rainer Forst: The Justification of Basic Rights

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2016
Auteurs Bertjan Wolthuis, Elaine Mak en Lisette ten Haaf
Auteursinformatie

Bertjan Wolthuis
Bertjan Wolthuis is assistant professor at the Department of Legal Theory and Legal History, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Elaine Mak
Elaine Mak is professor of Jurisprudence at the Institute of Constitutional, Administrative Law and Legal Theory, Utrecht University

Lisette ten Haaf
Lisette ten Haaf is PhD candidate at the Department of Legal Theory and Legal History, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Artikel

Access_open What Does it Mean to Justify Basic Rights?

Reply to Düwell, Newey, Rummens and Valentini

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2016
Auteurs Rainer Forst
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this paper, I reply to the four comments on my paper ‘The Justification of Basic Rights: A Discourse-Theoretical Approach’ given by Laura Valentini, Marcus Düwell, Stefan Rummens and Glen Newey.


Rainer Forst
Professor of Political Theory and Philosophy at the Goethe Universität, Frankfurt am Main.
Artikel

Access_open Two Sides of the Same Coin

Unpacking Rainer Forst’s Basic Right to Justification

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2016
Auteurs Stefan Rummens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper makes two comments on Rainer Forst’s keynote contribution. It argues, first, that three important distinctions introduced by Forst are, in fact, all different versions of the more primary distinction between the a priori reconstruction of basic rights by philosophers and the discursive construction of basic rights by citizens. It proposes, secondly, an alternative discourse-theoretical reconstruction which makes a distinction between the basic right to justification and the basic right to choose your own ends as two different but inseparable rights – two sides of the same coin – which jointly provide the moral ground for our basic rights as citizens.


Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is professor of Moral Philosophy at the Institute of Philosophy of KU Leuven.

Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is Professor of Moral Philosophy at the Institute of Philosophy of the KU Leuven, Belgium.

Roland Pierik
Roland Pierik is Associate Professor of Legal Philosophy at the University of Amsterdam Law School.

Bertjan Wolthuis
Bertjan Wolthuis is Assistant Professor at the department of Legal Theory and Legal History at VU University Amsterdam.

Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is Associate Professor of Moral Philosophy at the Institute of Philosophy of the KU Leuven (Belgium).
Boekbespreking

Access_open Stefan Sottiaux, De Verenigde Staten van België

Reflecties over de toekomst van het grondwettelijk recht in de gelaagde rechtsorde

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2011
Auteurs Stefan Rummens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Book review of Stefan Sottiaux, De Verenigde Staten van België


Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is Assistant Professor of Political Theory at the Radboud University Nijmegen.

Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is Assistant Professor of Political Theory at the Institute of Management Research of the Radboud University Nijmegen.
Discussie

Access_open The Co-originality of Law and Democracy in the Moral Horizon of Modernity

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden co-originality, deliberative democracy, Habermas, Lefort, modernity
Auteurs Stefan Rummens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper argues that Neil Walker’s analysis of the complementary relationship between democracy and constitutionalism remains one-sided. It focuses only on the incompleteness of democracy and the democracy-realizing function of constitutionalism rather than also taking into account the reverse complementary and constitution-realizing function of democracy. In this paper, I defend a fuller account that takes into account this mutual complementarity between democracy and constitutionalism. Such an alternative approach is consequential for Walker’s argument in two respects. In terms of the general analysis of the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism, my adjusted approach leads to a defence of the Habermasian thesis of the co-originality of constitutionalism and democracy which is too quickly dismissed by Walker himself. A fuller appreciation of this co-originality suggests that the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy is perhaps, after all, more singularly complementary (as opposed to being both complementary and oppositional) than Walker recognizes. In terms of the more specific analysis of the impact of globalization, this adjusted approach tilts the argument in favour of the critics of current practices of postnational constitutionalism. Without complementary postnational democratic structures, this constitutionalism remains problematic and potentially oppressive.


Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is Assistant Professor of Political Theory at the Institute for Management Research of the Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Discussie

Access_open Constitutionalism and the Incompleteness of Democracy

A Reply to Four Critics

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden constitutionalism, globalization, democracy, modernity, postnational
Auteurs Neil Walker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This reply to critics reinforces and further develops a number of conclusions of the original paper. First, it answers the charge that it is biased in its discussion of the relative standing of constitutionalism and democracy today, tending to take the authority of the former for granted and concentrating its critical attention unduly on the incompleteness of democracy, by arguing that contemporary constitutionalism is deeply dependent upon democracy. Secondly, it reiterates and extends the claim of the original paper that the idea and practice of democracy is unable to supply its own resources in the development of just forms of political organization. Thirdly, it defends its key understanding of the overall relationship between democracy and constitutionalism as a ‘double relationship’, involving both mutual support and mutual tension. A fourth and last point is concerned to demonstrate how the deeper philosophical concerns raised by the author about the shifting relationship between democracy and constitutionalism and the conceptual reframing they prompt are important not just as an explanatory and evaluative window on an evolving configuration of political relations but also as an expression of that evolution, and to indicate how this new conceptual frame might condition how we approach the question of a democracy-sensitive institutional architecture for the global age.


Neil Walker
Neil Walker is Regius Professor of Public Law and the Law of Nature and Nations at the University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Redactioneel

Access_open Presentation

Editors of this special issue

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Auteurs Mireille Hildebrandt, Bart van Klink en Eric Tjong Tjin Tai
Auteursinformatie

Mireille Hildebrandt
Mireille Hildebrandt is Associate Professor of Jurisprudence at Erasmus University Rotterdam and senior researcher at the centre for Law Science Technology and Society Studies (LSTS), Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Bart van Klink
Bart van Klink is Professor of Legal Methodology at VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Eric Tjong Tjin Tai
Eric Tjong Tjin Tai is Professor of Private Law at Tilburg University.
Artikel

Access_open Is de vrijheid van godsdienst in de moderne multiculturele samenleving nog een hanteerbaar recht?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2010
Trefwoorden freedom of religion, human rights, human dignity, traditional religion, unequal treatment
Auteurs Koo van der Wal
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    There are two fundamental problems with regard to the freedom of religion. The first concerns the content and scope of the right; the second, a possible unequal treatment between population groups. The first problem can only be dealt with by a preliminary analysis of the religious phenomenon, which precedes a legal definition. It turns out that there is a range of different types of religion, with on the one hand traditional forms of religion which are narrowly interwoven with the culture in question (all kinds of ‘cultural’ practices possessing a religious dimension), and on the other forms of religion which loosen to a considerable extent the ties between culture and religion. Evidently, the former types of religion cause problems in modern society. An additional problem is that freedom of religion as a modern basic right rests on a view of human being – including the idea of the inherent dignity and autonomy of the human person – which is at odds with the symbolic universe of traditional religion. The conclusion of the article is that in the modern pluralist society freedom of religion is on its way to becoming, or already has become, an unmanageable right. So the problems arising around this right (including that of unequal treatment) can only be solved in a pragmatic, not really satisfactory way. In that context, modern humanitarian standards should be observed in the implementation of the right of freedom of religion because fundamental human rights are connected with a specific concept of humanity.


Koo van der Wal
Koo van der Wal is emeritus professor of Philosophy at the University of Amsterdam and the Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Interface Showing Amount
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.