Zoekresultaat: 209 artikelen

x
Article

Access_open The Common Law Remedy of Habeas Corpus Through the Prism of a Twelve-Point Construct

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Habeas corpus, common law, detainee, Consitution, liberty
Auteurs Chuks Okpaluba en Anthony Nwafor
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Long before the coming of the Bill of Rights in written Constitutions, the common law has had the greatest regard for the personal liberty of the individual. In order to safeguard that liberty, the remedy of habeas corpus was always available to persons deprived of their liberty unlawfully. This ancient writ has been incorporated into the modern Constitution as a fundamental right and enforceable as other rights protected by virtue of their entrenchment in those Constitutions. This article aims to bring together the various understanding of habeas corpus at common law and the principles governing the writ in common law jurisdictions. The discussion is approached through a twelve-point construct thus providing a brief conspectus of the subject matter, such that one could have a better understanding of the subject as applied in most common law jurisdictions.


Chuks Okpaluba
Chuks Okpaluba, LLB LLM (London), PhD (West Indies), is a Research Fellow at the Free State Centre for Human Rights, University of the Free State, South Africa. Email: okpaluba@mweb.co.za.

Anthony Nwafor
Anthony O. Nwafor, LLB, LLM, (Nigeria), PhD (UniJos), BL, is Professor at the School of Law, University of Venda, South Africa. Email: Anthony.Nwafor@univen.ac.za.
Article

Access_open The Right to Claim Innocence in Poland

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden wrongful convictions, right to claim innocence, reopening of criminal proceedings, miscarriage of justice, revision of final judgment
Auteurs Wojciech Jasiński Ph.D., habilitation en Karolina Kremens Ph.D.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice, their reasons and effects, only rarely become the subject of academic debate in Poland. This article aims at filling this gap and providing a discussion on the current challenges of mechanisms available in Polish law focused on the verification of final judgments based on innocence claims. While there are two procedures designed to move such judgment: cassation and the reopening of criminal proceedings, only the latter aims at the verification of new facts and evidence, and this work remains focused exactly on that issue. The article begins with a case study of the famous Komenda case, which resulted in a successful innocence claim, serving as a good, though rare, example of reopening a case and acquitting the convict immediately and allows for discussing the reasons that commonly stand behind wrongful convictions in Poland. Furthermore, the article examines the innocence claim grounds as regulated in the Polish criminal procedure and their interpretation under the current case law. It also presents the procedure concerning the revision of the case. The work additionally provides the analysis of the use of innocence claim in practice, feeding on the statistical data and explaining tendencies in application for revision of a case. It also presents the efforts of the Polish Ombudsman and NGOs to raise public awareness in that field. The final conclusions address the main challenges that the Polish system faces concerning innocence claims and indicates the direction in which the system should go.


Wojciech Jasiński Ph.D., habilitation
Wojciech Jasiński is Assistant Professor in the Department of Criminal Procedure of the University of Wroclaw, Poland. orcid.org/0000-0002-7427-1474

Karolina Kremens Ph.D.
Karolina Kremens is Assistant Professor in the Department of Criminal Procedure of the University of Wroclaw, Poland. orcid.org/0000-0002-2132-2645

    In this episode of ‘In conversation with’ we are interviewing dr. Amalia Campos Delgado about her research on migration and border control in Mexico.


Maartje van der Woude
Prof. mr. dr. M.A.H. van der Woude is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie bij het Van Vollenhoven Instituut voor Recht, Bestuur & Samenleving bij de Universiteit Leiden en redacteur van dit blad.
Artikel

Vrijheidsontneming, penitentiaire beginselen en de eendentest

Over de aard van vreemdelingenbewaring

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden vreemdelingenbewaring, vrijheidsontneming, penitentiair recht, Wet terugkeer en vreemdelingenbewaring, visitatie isoleercel
Auteurs Mr. drs. Frans-Willem Verbaas
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, immigration detention is classified under administrative law. More precisely: it is a form of administrative coercion. But immigration detention is also deprivation of liberty, or a habeas corpus measure. This makes it the most far-reaching form of administrative coercion you can think of. The regime and house rules of immigration detention differ just a little from those of criminal deprivation of liberty. The draft bill on the Return and Detention Act provides some improvements. For asylum seekers that cause nuisance, there is the Enforcement and Supervision Location, where the foreign national is given an area restriction and must remain within the municipal boundaries. Due to the liberty restrictions, immigration detention should always be the last resort.


Mr. drs. Frans-Willem Verbaas
Mr. drs. F.W. Verbaas is advocaat bij Collet Advocaten Alkmaar. Hij is mensenrechtenadvocaat en gespecialiseerd in penitentiair recht en vreemdelingenrecht, waaronder vreemdelingenbewaring.
Artikel

Access_open ‘Ik verblijf in een gevangenis, daar is niets moreels aan.’ Ervaren procedurele rechtvaardigheid bij binnenkomst in vreemdelingenbewaring.

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden procedurele rechtvaardigheid, legitimiteit, vreemdelingenbewaring, binnenkomstprocedure, vreemdelingen
Auteurs Nicolien de Gier MSc, Mieke Kox MA, Prof. mr. dr. Miranda Boone e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Qualitative research in an immigration detention center in the Netherlands shows that detained unauthorized migrants consider the entry procedure in Immigration Centre Rotterdam procedurally just. These migrants are generally positive on the fairness of the entry procedure as their safety and welfare are guaranteed and existing procedural justice criteria are respected. However, they believe that immigration detention in itself is illegitimate and that they do not deserve to be detained. This shows that the focus on procedures and interactions is insufficient to understand the perceived legitimacy of immigration detention if shared values and consent with the legal basis of immigration detention are lacking.


Nicolien de Gier MSc
C.N. de Gier MSc is docent Criminologie bij de Universiteit Leiden.

Mieke Kox MA
M.H. Kox MA is postdoc Sociale Geografie bij de Universiteit Utrecht.

Prof. mr. dr. Miranda Boone
Prof. mr. dr. M.M. Boone is hoogleraar Criminologie en Vergelijkende Penologie bij de Universiteit Leiden.

Dr. Gabry Vanderveen
Dr. G.N.G. Vanderveen is universitair docent Erasmus School of Law bij de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Artikel

Highlights vreemdelingenbewaring

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden vreemdelingenbewaring, Terugkeerrichtlijn, Opvangrichtlijn, Dublinverordening
Auteurs Jim Waasdorp
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article focuses on some key features of immigration detention. It contains information about the Return Directive, the Reception Directive and the Dublin Regulation. By doing so, this article aimes at providing an overview of immigration detention in a European law perspective. Furthermore, it adresses some recent developments in Dutch case law.


Jim Waasdorp
Mr. J.R.K.A.M. Waasdorp is rechter in opleiding in de rechtbank Den Haag en buitenpromovendus bij de Universiteit Utrecht en redacteur van dit blad.
Jurisprudentie

Annotatie Lang

Ophouden in de transitzone toch een bewaringsmaatregel

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 2 2020
Auteurs Mr. Aniel Pahladsingh
Auteursinformatie

Mr. Aniel Pahladsingh
Mr. A. Pahladsingh is jurist bij de Raad van State en redacteur van dit tijdschrift.
Article

Access_open Mechanisms for Correcting Judicial Errors in Germany

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden criminal proceedings, retrial in favour of the convicted, retrial to the disadvantage of the defendant, Germany, judicial errors
Auteurs Michael Lindemann en Fabienne Lienau
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article presents the status quo of the law of retrial in Germany and gives an overview of the law and practice of the latter in favour of the convicted and to the disadvantage of the defendant. Particularly, the formal and material prerequisites for a successful petition to retry the criminal case are subject to a detailed presentation and evaluation. Because no official statistics are kept regarding successful retrial processes in Germany, the actual number of judicial errors is primarily the subject of more or less well-founded estimates by legal practitioners and journalists. However, there are a few newer empirical studies devoted to different facets of the subject. These studies will be discussed in this article in order to outline the state of empirical research on the legal reality of the retrial procedure. Against this background, the article will ultimately highlight currently discussed reforms and subject these to a critical evaluation as well. The aim of the recent reform efforts is to add a ground for retrial to the disadvantage of the defendant for cases in which new facts or evidence indicate that the acquitted person was guilty. After detailed discussion, the proposal in question is rejected, inter alia for constitutional reasons.


Michael Lindemann
Michael Lindemann is Professor for Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Criminology at the Faculty of Law of Bielefeld University, Germany.

Fabienne Lienau
Fabienne Lienau is Research Assistant at the Chair held by Michael Lindemann.

    The entry into force of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) pushed state obligations to counter prejudice and stereotypes concerning people with disabilities to the forefront of international human rights law. The CRPD is underpinned by a model of inclusive equality, which views disability as a social construct that results from the interaction between persons with impairments and barriers, including attitudinal barriers, that hinder their participation in society. The recognition dimension of inclusive equality, together with the CRPD’s provisions on awareness raising, mandates that states parties target prejudice and stereotypes about the capabilities and contributions of persons with disabilities to society. Certain human rights treaty bodies, including the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and, to a much lesser extent, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, require states to eradicate harmful stereotypes and prejudice about people with disabilities in various forms of interpersonal relationships. This trend is also reflected, to a certain extent, in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. This article assesses the extent to which the aforementioned human rights bodies have elaborated positive obligations requiring states to endeavour to change ‘hearts and minds’ about the inherent capabilities and contributions of people with disabilities. It analyses whether these bodies have struck the right balance in elaborating positive obligations to eliminate prejudice and stereotypes in interpersonal relationships. Furthermore, it highlights the convergences or divergences that are evident in the bodies’ approaches to those obligations.


Andrea Broderick
Andrea Broderick is Assistant Professor at the Universiteit Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Artikel

Access_open Recidive na verblijf in buitenlandse detentie

Een studie onder teruggekeerde gedetineerden in Nederland

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 5 2020
Trefwoorden reoffending, foreign detention, returning prisoners
Auteurs Matthias van Hall MSc en Laura Cleofa-van der Zwet MSW
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Worldwide, at least 1,900 Dutch prisoners are housed in foreign detention every year. Although previous research describes this group of prisoners and the conditions of their detention, it is unknown to what extent they reoffend after returning to the Netherlands. A unique dataset with data of 690 Dutch people has been used. They are supervised during their foreign detention by the International Office, part of the Dutch Probation Service. The results show that 23% of this group reoffended within two years. Furthermore, the probability of reoffending differs for the country of detention, age, way of return and prior incarcerations.


Matthias van Hall MSc
M. van Hall MSc is promovendus bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving.

Laura Cleofa-van der Zwet MSW
L. Cleofa-van der Zwet MSW is regiocoördinator Bureau Buitenland bij Reclassering Nederland.
Artikel

Access_open Pleidooi voor en uitwerking van een maximalistisch herstelrecht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden maximalistisch herstelrecht, subsidiariteitsbeginsel, elektronische thuisdetentie, taakstraf, schadevergoedingsmaatregel
Auteurs Jacques Claessen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article contains a plea for a further operationalization of the subsidiarity principle (penal law and punishment as ultimum remedium) through a maximalist restorative justice, i.e. a restorative justice that not only offers space for ‘voluntary processes’ and agreed restoration, but also for ‘compulsory procedures’ and imposed restoration. An attempt is made to make the maximalist arsenal of restorative sanctions as concrete as possible. Two examples of sanctions that are ‘constructed’ in a restorative way in this article, are restorative community service and restorative electronic home detention. This article is based on work by John Blad and Lode Walgrave that has previously appeared in Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht.


Jacques Claessen
Jacques Claessen is bijzonder hoogleraar herstelrecht en universitair hoofddocent strafrecht aan de Universiteit Maastricht en rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Limburg.
Artikel

Access_open The Obligation of Judges to Uphold Rules of Positive Law and Possibly Conflicting Ethical Values in Context

The Case of Criminalization of Homelessness in Hungary

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Judicial independence, Rule of law, Judicial ethics, Hungary, Criminalization of homelessness
Auteurs Petra Gyöngyi
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article examines the tension between the constitutional obligation of judges to uphold rules of positive law and possibly conflicting standards of conduct arising from professional-ethical values. The theoretical analysis will be illustrated by the case of Hungary, an EU member state experiencing rule of law challenges since 2010 and where the 2018-2019 criminalization of homelessness exemplifies the studied tension. Inspired by the theories of Philip Selznick and Martin Krygier, rule of law will be viewed as a value that requires progressive realization and context-specific implementation. By contextualizing the relevant Hungarian constitutional framework with the content of the judicial code of ethics and judicial practice, it will be shown how the legitimate space for Hungarian judges to distance themselves from legislation possibly in conflict with rule of law values is reduced. Theoretical suggestions for addressing such rule of law regressions will be made.


Petra Gyöngyi
Petra Gyöngyi is postdoctoral fellow aan de University of Oslo.
Essay

‘Porn’ graffiti in public space

Between moralization and agonism

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden porn, graffiti, public space, street art, morality
Auteurs Prof. Dr. Lucas Melgaço
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Sexualized graffiti has emerged on walls in Brussels since the beginning of 2013, generating fierce debates. Perceived as street art and a welcome challenge to heteropatriarchy by some and as obscenity and vulgarity by others, these pieces highlight the inherently contested character of public spaces. The controversies around the presence of these paintings in public space relate to what in the literature has become known as moral geographies, that is, the spatial aspect of morality. What should one do about these supposed ‘porn’ pieces: regulate their existence and control potential tensions and conflicts, or let frictions emerge between the partisans and the opponents of such urban interventions? Who gets to say what should be tolerated and what should be regulated in public space? In this opinion piece, I situate this issue between two ends: an agonistic one, in which contestation is the rule; and an excessively regulatory one, in which public space is over-rationalized and normalized.


Prof. Dr. Lucas Melgaço
Lucas Melgaço is werkzaam aan het Department of Criminology van de Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB).
Article

Access_open Age Limits in Youth Justice: A Comparative and Conceptual Analysis

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden youth justice, age limits, minimum age of criminal responsibility, age of criminal majority, legal comparison
Auteurs Jantien Leenknecht, Johan Put en Katrijn Veeckmans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In each youth justice system, several age limits exist that indicate what type of reaction can and may be connected to the degree of responsibility that a person can already bear. Civil liability, criminal responsibility and criminal majority are examples of concepts on which age limits are based, but whose definition and impact is not always clear. Especially as far as the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) is concerned, confusion exists in legal doctrine. This is apparent from the fact that international comparison tables often show different MACRs for the same country. Moreover, the international literature often seems to define youth justice systems by means of a lower and upper limit, whereas such a dual distinction is too basic to comprehend the complex multilayer nature of the systems. This contribution therefore maps out and conceptually clarifies the different interpretations and consequences of the several age limits that exist within youth justice systems. To that extent, the age limits of six countries are analysed: Argentina, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Northern Ireland. This legal comparison ultimately leads to a proposal to establish a coherent conceptual framework on age limits in youth justice.


Jantien Leenknecht
Jantien Leenknecht is PhD Fellow of the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) at KU Leuven, Institute of Social Law and Leuven Institute of Criminology.

Johan Put
Johan Put is Full Professor at KU Leuven, Institute of Social Law and Leuven Institute of Criminology.

Katrijn Veeckmans
Katrijn Veeckmans is PhD Fellow at KU Leuven, Institute of Social Law and Leuven Institute of Criminology.
Article

Access_open Characteristics of Young Adults Sentenced with Juvenile Sanctions in the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden young adult offenders, juvenile sanctions for young adults, juvenile criminal law, psychosocial immaturity
Auteurs Lise Prop, André van der Laan, Charlotte Barendregt e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Since 1 April 2014, young adults aged 18 up to and including 22 years can be sentenced with juvenile sanctions in the Netherlands. This legislation is referred to as ‘adolescent criminal law’ (ACL). An important reason for the special treatment of young adults is their over-representation in crime. The underlying idea of ACL is that some young adult offenders are less mature than others. These young adults may benefit more from pedagogically oriented juvenile sanctions than from the deterrent focus of adult sanctions. Little is known, however, about the characteristics of the young adults sentenced with juvenile sanctions since the implementation of ACL. The aim of this study is to gain insight into the demographic, criminogenic and criminal case characteristics of young adult offenders sentenced with juvenile sanctions in the first year after the implementation of ACL. A cross-sectional study was conducted using a juvenile sanction group and an adult sanction group. Data on 583 criminal cases of young adults, sanctioned from 1 April 2014 up to March 2015, were included. Data were obtained from the Public Prosecution Service, the Dutch Probation Service and Statistics Netherlands. The results showed that characteristics indicating problems across different domains were more prevalent among young adults sentenced with juvenile sanctions. Furthermore, these young adults committed a greater number of serious offences compared with young adults who were sentenced with adult sanctions. The findings of this study provide support for the special treatment of young adult offenders in criminal law as intended by ACL.


Lise Prop
Lise Prop is researcher at the Research and Documentation Centre (WODC), Den Haag, the Netherlands.

André van der Laan
André van der Laan is senior researcher at the Research and Documentation Centre (WODC), Den Haag, the Netherlands.

Charlotte Barendregt
Charlotte Barendregt is senior advisor at the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Chijs van Nieuwenhuizen
Chijs van Nieuwenhuizen is professor at Tilburg University, and treatment manager at the Centre for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Article

Access_open Safeguarding the Dynamic Legal Position of Children: A Matter of Age Limits?

Reflections on the Fundamental Principles and Practical Application of Age Limits in Light of International Children’s Rights Law

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden age limits, dynamic legal position, children’s rights, maturity, evolving capacities
Auteurs Stephanie Rap, Eva Schmidt en Ton Liefaard
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article a critical reflection upon age limits applied in the law is provided, in light of the tension that exists in international children’s rights law between the protection of children and the recognition of their evolving autonomy. The main research question that will be addressed is to what extent the use of (certain) age limits is justified under international children’s rights law. The complexity of applying open norms and theoretically underdeveloped concepts as laid down in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, related to the development and evolving capacities of children as rights holders, will be demonstrated. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child struggles to provide comprehensive guidance to states regarding the manner in which the dynamic legal position of children should be applied in practice. The inconsistent application of age limits that govern the involvement of children in judicial procedures provides states leeway in granting children autonomy, potentially leading to the establishment of age limits based on inappropriate – practically, politically or ideologically motivated – grounds.


Stephanie Rap
Stephanie Rap is assistant professor in children’s rights at the Department of Child Law, Leiden Law School, the Netherlands.

Eva Schmidt
Eva Schmidt is PhD candidate at the Department of Child Law, Leiden Law School, the Netherlands.

Ton Liefaard
Ton Liefaard is Vice-Dean of Leiden Law School and holds the UNICEF Chair in Children’s Rights at Leiden University, Leiden Law School, the Netherlands.
Article

Access_open Age Limits in Law: Between Behavioural Science and Human Rights

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden age limits, behavioural science, human rights, age, juvenile justice
Auteurs Frank Weerman en Jolande uit Beijerse
Auteursinformatie

Frank Weerman
Frank Weerman is endowed professor Youth Criminology at the Erasmus School of Law and senior researcher at the NSCR (Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement).

Jolande uit Beijerse
Jolande uit Beijerse is associate professor Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure at the Erasmus School of Law.
Artikel

COVID-19/CATCH-22

Besmettingsgevaar en voorlopige hechtenis

Tijdschrift Boom Strafblad, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Corona, Voorlopige hechtenis, EVRM
Auteurs Mr. dr. P.P.J. (Patrick) van der Meij
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Er is veel af te dingen op de Nederlandse praktijk van de voorlopige hechtenis. Het wettelijk systeem kent veel voorwaarden en nuances die ten onrechte de indruk wekken dat een verdachte niet zomaar in voorlopige hechtenis wordt genomen of gehouden. Die kritiek op de voorlopige hechtenis klinkt nog luider nu noodverordeningen zijn afgekondigd vanwege het besmettingsgevaar van het coronavirus. De rechters die over de voorlopige hechtenis en het voortduren daarvan oordelen, lijken in tegenstelling tot de ernst van de situatie vooralsnog weinig toeschietelijk in het honoreren van schorsingsverzoeken.


Mr. dr. P.P.J. (Patrick) van der Meij
Patrick van der Meij is strafrechtadvocaat en partner bij Cleerdin & Hamer Advocaten, research fellow bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie in de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid aan de Universiteit Leiden en redacteur van dit tijdschrift.
Artikel

Access_open De rechtspositie van aangehouden minderjarige verdachten in de eerste fase van het strafrechtelijk onderzoek

Tijdschrift Boom Strafblad, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Jeugdstrafrecht, IVRK, Rechtsbijstand, EU Richtlijn 2016/800
Auteurs Mr. drs. M. (Marije) Jeltes
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In deze bijdrage wordt de rechtspositie van aangehouden minderjarige verdachten vanaf het moment van aanhouding tot en met de voorgeleiding onderzocht en naast de lat van Europese en internationale kinderrechten gelegd. Welke rechten en plichten hebben minderjarige verdachten in het Nederlandse rechtssysteem tijdens de eerste fase van het strafrechtelijk onderzoek, welke rol hebben Europese regelgeving en internationale kinderrechten in de totstandkoming van deze rechten en plichten gespeeld en voldoet Nederland aan dit internationale kader van kinderrechten?


Mr. drs. M. (Marije) Jeltes
Marije Jeltes is jurist en jeugdcriminoloog en als docent en onderzoeker werkzaam bij de afdeling Jeugdrecht van de faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden. Zij is tevens (kinder)rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de rechtbank Amsterdam en rechtbank Rotterdam en lid van de afdeling Advisering van de Raad voor Strafrechtstoepassing en Jeugdbescherming (RSJ).
Toont 1 - 20 van 209 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
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.