The article deals with the possibility of socializing law students through space. It first indicates which features of space affect the possibility of influencing interactions and identity. It then discusses how we can use symbolic interactionism to study interactions and socialization in spaces of law faculties. Then, on the basis of the interviews conducted with law faculty students about their space perception, it shows how to research student socialization through space and how far-reaching its effects can be.

De auteur betoogt dat met de doelstellingen achter het informatiemanipulatieverbod van de Marktmisbruikverordening wordt beoogd het vertrouwen van het algemeen publiek, in tegenstelling tot slechts het vertrouwen van het beleggend publiek, te waarborgen. Een helder begrip van deze doelstellingen is noodzakelijk voor de effectieve handhaving van het informatiemanipulatieverbod.

Convict criminology draws from personal experience of imprisonment to offer critical criminological perspectives on punishment and prisons. In this article I discuss how some of these are aligned with questions of narrative and post-colonial perspectives in criminology. I use autoethnographic vignettes to communicate the experiences of imprisonment that inform the development of convict criminology, and I explore their relationship to narrative criminology’s interest in personal stories.

Critical narrative criminologists analyse dominant and institutionalised stories that can contribute to harm but they might also become more involved in interrogating and changing such narratives. The following question would be: in what ways can this be done? Based on experiences from a Participatory Action Research (PAR) project on stigma with people who use(d) illegal drugs, this paper reflects on the epistemological opportunities and challenges of fusing narrative criminology with PAR. Although such an integration raises potential tensions – especially with regard to the role of the researcher – PAR can amplify narrative criminology by offering a framework for practicing critical, ethical and socially engaged scholarship. Vice versa, narrative criminology can deepen PAR in its analysis of discursive power structures and the relation between narratives and action.

This article argues that it is legitimate for the state to practice soft paternalism towards changing hearts and minds in order to prevent behaviour that is discriminatory. Liberals accept that it is not legitimate for the state to intervene in order to change how people think because ideas and beliefs are wrong in themselves. It is legitimate for the state to intervene with the actions of a person only when there is a risk of harm to others and when there is a threat to social coexistence. Preventive action of the state is legitimate if we consider the immaterial and material harm that discrimination causes. It causes harm to the social standing of the person, psychological harm, economic and existential harm. All these harms threaten peaceful social coexistence. This article traces a theory of permissible government action. Research in the areas of behavioural psychology, neuroscience and social psychology indicates that it is possible to bring about a change in hearts and minds. Encouraging a person to adopt the perspective of the person who has experienced discrimination can lead to empathetic understanding. This, can lead a person to critically evaluate her prejudice. The paper argues that soft paternalism towards changing hearts and minds is legitimate in order to prevent harm to others. It attempts to legitimise state coercion in order to eliminate prejudice and broader social patterns of inequality and marginalisation. And it distinguishes between appropriate and non-appropriate avenues the state could pursue in order to eliminate prejudice. Policies towards eliminating prejudice should address the rational and the emotional faculties of a person. They should aim at using methods and techniques that focus on persuasion and reduce coercion. They should raise awareness of what prejudice is and how it works in order to facilitate well-informed voluntary decisions. The version of soft paternalism towards changing minds and attitudes defended in this article makes it consistent with liberalism.

In this article the ways in which philosophers have thought about greed are discussed. From antiquity until the Renaissance greed was considered to be a sin. This immoderate desire had to be stopped because it constitutes a threat to the wellbeing of both an individual and society as a whole. This changed since the beginning of the modern era, when a more positive attitude towards this excessive desire arose. The new opinion was: private vices lead to public benefits, and thus the normalization of an excess came about. Greed no longer was considered to be a sin or vice, but instead to be a harmless passion that had a good effect on the welfare of society. The financial crisis of 2008 may have induced some doubts concerning the idea that greed is good, but a real change in opinion has not yet occurred.

This article deals with the relationship of smart security technologies to broader modes of exercising power and subjugating individuals. It claims that the notion of psychopower is precisely what is missing from post-Foucaultian accounts of the smart city. In the article psychopower is defined as the manipulation of our consciousness in order to channel our desires toward ‘normal’ social behavior, drawing a line between what is ‘acceptable’ and what is ‘unacceptable’. Psychopower raises a series of concerns related to its democratic legitimacy and accountability as behaviorally informed conditioning of the mind runs the risk of constant surveillance, where human agency is diluted in a techno-utopian vision that promises to improve city-wide efficiency, decision-making, and security.

Naar aanleiding van een door socioloog Bas van Stokkom georganiseerde conferentie over de grenzen van slachtofferemancipatie schetst de auteur een korte mentaliteitsgeschiedenis van de versterkte positie van het slachtoffer in strafrecht en samenleving sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Het woord slachtoffer heeft niet alleen in verschillende tijden maar ook in verschillende contexten een andere lading gekregen. De auteur behandelt de vraag waar de theoretische en praktische grenzen van de emancipatie van het slachtoffer in het strafrecht liggen.

In this article, we discuss a particular form of interdisciplinary legal research. We focus on a discipline that may be fruitfully combined with doctrinal research, namely philosophy. The aim of this article is to give an account of the methods of philosophy that are most relevant and useful for doctrinal legal scholars. Our focus is therefore mostly on legal philosophy and the philosophical subdisciplines closely related to it, such as political philosophy and ethics. We characterize legal philosophy in three complementary ways: as an activity, as insights, and as theories. We then discuss three methods of legal philosophy: argumentation analysis and construction, author analysis and reflective equilibrium. In the practice of research these three methods are usually combined, as we will show with various examples.

To address the potential of public policy on the governance of OARs it is necessary to define what is meant by public policy and the importance of public policy in designing an efficient governance framework. Critical components are the subject matter of public policy and its objectives. Hence, it is useful to consider declarations, policies and statements in relation to open access practice and examine the efficiency of these arrangements towards the improvement of stakeholders’ engagement in governance of OARs. Secondly, policies relating to dissemination of scientific information via OARs should be examined. In this regard, it is relevant to consider the public policy basis for Intellectual Property (IP) laws that concerning the utility of OARs. Therefore, economic theories relevant with the role of IP laws should be examined. Such examination depicts to what extend these laws facilitate the utility of OARs. In order to specify justifications for the desirability of OARs the objectives of social theories should be also considered. Thus, there is consternation that without legal protection against copying the incentive to create intellectual property will be undermined. As scholarly communication infrastructure evolves, it is necessary to recognize the efforts of the relationship between Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) and communication technologies in the context of public policy and after engagement with it. After employing such multilevel approach, the paper argues about a socio-economic framework to enhance the governance of OARs through public policy.

Multi-national corporations are increasingly facing attention and disapproval by different actors, including authorities, public and (non-) commercial organizations. Digital globalization and especially social media as a low-cost, highly interactive and multidirectional platform shape a unique context for this rising attention. In the literature, much attention has been devoted to top-down approaches and strategies that corporations use to avoid stigmatization and sanctioning of their behaviour. Reactions to corporate harm are, however, seldom researched from a labelling perspective. As a result, corporations are not considered as objects towards whom labelling is targeted but rather as actors who hamper such processes and who, as moral entrepreneurs, influence which behaviour is labelled deviant. Based on theoretical analysis of literature and case studies, this article will discuss how the process of labelling has changed in light of the digitalized, late-modern society and consequently, how the process should be revisited to be applicable for corporate deviance. Given a diversification of moral entrepreneurs and increasingly dependency of labelling and meaning-making on the online sphere, two new forms of labelling are introduced that specifically target institutions; that is bottom-up and horizontal labelling.

Two developments are discussed that have a significant influence on the scope and content of the penology of the future, but otherwise have little to do with each other: The expansion of the sentencing field has resulted in a completely fluid research field. However, the important questions of penology can only be answered by integrally mapping and analyzing that sentencing field. For that reason, penology should radically free itself of the limitation of its field of research to the penal sanction. Ongoing insight into the functioning of the brain and the predictability of behavior on the basis of algorithms shine a different light on the portraits of mankind on which we base punishment. It also exposes a range of new possibilities to influence behavior and prevent criminal behavior. It is also part of the research field of penology to question which of those possibilities we want to use and under which conditions.