Traditionally, the mayor has an important role as a citizen’s father and as a maintainer of public order. In the context of the so-called ‘undermining’ criminality, the mayor has been increasingly empowered with new legal instruments to combat undermining criminality. Some mayors see themselves as a sheriff. However, in the Dutch Municipal Act, the mayor only has a task of maintaining the public order. How does this task relate to combating undermining criminality? What is the role of the mayor in the combat of undermining criminality? Nowadays, there is no legal basis in the Dutch Municipal Act to equip the mayor with crime-fighting duties. This article proposes to equip the mayor with a legal duty as a crime fighter.

In previous observational studies among operational police officers, some officers stated that if a victim is not willing to (officially) report a crime to the police, they are not able to police these cases. This rather cynical and fatalistic statement raises several questions. What do police officers mean when they say this? What do they actually do in those cases and why? In this paper we try to answer these questions based on explorative qualitative interviews with several police officers in two police teams in the Netherlands. The results show that even though police officers recognize these statements among their colleagues, they do not agree with them and in practice police officers show a lot of effort and involvement in these cases. In fact, police officers have several possible strategies available to deal with these cases. Which strategy they opt for depends on various pragmatic, organisational and moral considerations.

In het verband van de aanpak van ondermijnende misdaad zal de sluitingsbevoegdheid, die is neergelegd in artikel 174a, eerste lid, Gemeentewet, worden uitgebreid met twee nieuwe sluitingsgronden. Op deze wijze kunnen woningen ook worden gesloten indien de openbare orde door ernstig geweld of geweld wordt verstoord. Hoe moet deze uitbreiding worden aangemerkt? Is het vooral een instrument voor de burgemeester als openbare-ordehandhaver of als sheriff? In dit redactioneel wordt betoogd om een wettelijke taak voor de burgemeester in de bestuurlijke aanpak van misdaad te ontwikkelen.

In dit artikel zal een inhoudelijk en operationeel normatief kader worden geformuleerd voor de toepassing van voorlopige hechtenis, waarbij de focus ligt op het zo veel mogelijk reduceren van het percentage onschuldigen dat aan het vrijheidsbenemende dwangmiddel wordt blootgesteld. Doel van de bijdrage is het inspireren van de wetgever om het moderniseringsproject te baat te nemen om de voorlopigehechtenisregeling grondig(er) te hervormen.

In the Netherlands, over the past 25 years mayors have had an increasing number of formal powers, based on administrative law, to fight against crime and disorder. Now, the Dutch mayors have the power to impose a restraining order, to close houses in case of drugs and/or drugs trade, or to decline a request for a permit when it might be used for illegal activities.
To implement these measures, the local government is highly dependent on (information provided by) the police. At this moment we do not have much information about this cooperation between local government and the police in the management of crime and disorder. This paper is based on an empirical study concerning this issue. It shows that the inter-organizational cooperation between local government and the police may differ strongly, however this cooperation still often depends on central factors and circumstances. An important factor is the (growing) distance between the police and local government in regard to the local approach of problems of crime and disorder. A significant number of local police officers concentrates mainly on the maintenance of law and order by criminal law enforcement instead of the implementation of administrative measures. As a result, local government is often unsatisfied about the contribution of the police. For example, the quality of the information provided by the police is often perceived as insufficient. In some cases local governments try to diminish the degree of interdependency with the police and to strengthen their own position in the local safety domain.

Zowel door het wetsvoorstel bestuurlijk verbod ondermijnende organisaties als door de verruiming van artikel 13b Opiumwet wil de regering de ondermijning aanpakken. Probleem is wel dat de politie nauwelijks geschoold is in de van het strafrecht afwijkende procesregels uit het bestuursrecht.

How does the police deal with conflict resolution and (referrals to) mediation? Is this perceived as relevant within the new national police organization? This article elaborates on work processes within the National Police, including ZSM-settlements, the punitive aspects of police culture and the impoverishment of neighborhood-oriented police work. It is concluded that there is little room within the police for responsive approaches to crime and social unsafety. However, there are still police professionals who question ‘assembly line’-processing of criminal cases, support restorative justice strategies and try to improve the citizen-empowerment in neighbourhoods.

De hulpofficier van justitie is een zeer belangrijke figuur in de Nederlandse strafrechtspleging. Ondanks de soms vergaande bevoegdheden van de hulpofficier is er weinig duidelijkheid over de competenties waarover de 4000 Nederlandse hulpofficieren moeten beschikken. Al in 2013 is door minister, politie en OM aangekondigd dat er gewerkt gaat worden aan een officier ‘nieuwe stijl’, met een versterkte rol en gekoppeld aan een nieuwe, betere opleiding. Welke visie aan deze versterking ten grondslag ligt, is echter niet bekend. Desalniettemin wordt ook in de moderniseringsoperatie voor het Wetboek van Strafvordering gezinspeeld op de nieuwe, versterkte positie van de hulpofficier. In dit artikel wordt ingegaan op de rol van de hulpofficier en (het gebrek aan) de discussie daarover. Vervolgens worden de plannen voor de versterkte rol van de hulpofficier (voor zover bekend) besproken en worden de in het kader van de modernisering van het Wetboek van Strafvordering voorgestelde veranderingen tegen het licht gehouden. Door een gebrek aan (informatie over een) duidelijke visie en een rommelig toegelicht conceptwetsvoorstel is het vooralsnog lastig om enthousiast te worden.

This empirical study examines how criminal investigative police officers (re)construct a criminal case and the vulnerabilities of their logic.The investigation process is analyzed through Goffman’s framing and interaction theories. While Goffman’s theories have been widely applied to other disciplines, such contributions remain rare in criminology. Here, they shed light on how detectives understand and give meaning to the situation surrounding the criminal case they encounter. The results indicate that this approach shows promise for improving our understanding of the investigative process, if complemented by other theoretical views.

Academic researchers in the Netherlands working on organized crime often make use of police files. This produces a lot of knowledge and helps building and testing theories about organized crime. However, it is also known that police files have their limitations. This article uses the concept of ‘street-level bureaucracy’ to explain some of these limitations. For instance, routines and biases can influence the way an investigation is conducted, i.e. avoiding or not following up certain lines of enquiry. Researchers who make use of case file analysis should therefore keep in mind the extent to which an investigation team functioned as a street-level bureaucracy.

Both the Court of Justice and the regional Court of The Hague ruled the retention of telecommunications data directive and the Dutch Wet bewaarplicht telecommunicatiegegevens in violation of the right to respect for privacy. The police and the Dutch Prosecutors Office have attempted to clarify the importance of the retention for criminal investigation. However, without an efficiency and effectiveness assessment of the method to request and analyse telecommunication data, it is not possible to substantiate the significance of data retention. To ‘save’ the retention of telecommunication data in its current form, but also to assess the importance of the existing and new investigative methods, a thorough analysis is necessary.

After some serious failures in criminal justice procedures, in 2006 ‘critical review’ was introduced in the Dutch police as a measure to prevent tunnel vision in criminal investigation. An analysis of 26 review cases and interviews with representatives of the Dutch police forces shows that in practice reviewers are confronted with a fundamental dilemma of distance vs. involvement in their relation with criminal investigation team. Critical review proves to have concrete effects on the criminal investigation process, although their scope usually appears to be limited. Although these effects are modest and review takes scarce police resources, the authors recommend a continuation of critical review.

In the Netherlands the discussion on the recent increase in residential domains with some sort of enclosure is fuelled by references to foreign examples (gated communities). However, large scale gated communities are absent in the Netherlands. Rather, we speak of enclosed residential domains. This article analyses the societal forces behind their popularity. Trends facilitating the further development of enclosed residential domains appear to be stronger than those impeding it. The growing need for shelter and a living environment that is predictable and familiar is especially important. Lack of safety, however, cannot directly be regarded as a prominent factor.