Sinds het najaar van 2021 heeft het maken van ‘procesafspraken’ een hoge vlucht genomen in de Nederlandse strafrechtspraktijk. Het betreft een nieuwe en fundamenteel andere manier van procederen op basis van consensus met rechterlijke toetsing. Met het maken van procesafspraken trachten openbaar ministerie, advocatuur en rechtspraak het hoofd te bieden aan het toenemende aantal (omvangrijke) strafzaken. Deze bijdrage bespreekt het fenomeen en diverse actuele experimenten in verschillende arrondissementen, en gaat in op ervaringen met procesafspraken in andere Europese landen. Daarna volgt een kritische beschouwing van de eerste vonnissen waarin procesafspraken werden goedgekeurd. De bijdrage eindigt met een oproep tot wetgeving.

Domestic violence is a prevalent and persistent problem in society. To be able to effectively intervene in cases of domestic violence, protect victims, and reduce the costs of domestic violence, several initiatives have been implemented in recent years with the aim of improving the response to domestic violence. A multidisciplinary and systemic approach to tackling domestic violence has been introduced, which is especially important in complex cases. Police work together with different partners, among others, the organisation ‘Safe at Home’ (Veilig Thuis) and the public prosecutor. Police play a particularly important role in achieving immediate safety in cases of domestic violence, and work together with partners to accomplish more structural safety for all family members. The development towards a more holistic response to domestic violence in which the police work together with other organisations is important to be able to tackle domestic violence more effectively. Although the importance of collaboration between different organisations has been recognised, the multidisciplinary response is still in development, resulting in some problems in practice.

Though the position of victims of crime in criminal proceedings has improved on paper, it is claimed within both the academic as the legal community that realization of victims’ rights is inadequate. In this exploratory research, a broad group of (legal) professionals was systematically questioned on this matter. They were asked whether and where compliance with victims’ rights is lacking, and how this comes about in their view. Although much has improved, it appears that compliance by the authorities is not yet self-evident and fundamental mechanisms in the criminal justice system appear to hinder the realization of rights for victims.

In 2019-2020 werd voor de tweede keer de Wet verwijsindex risicojongeren geëvalueerd. In dit artikel doen wij verslag van de belangrijkste bevindingen van deze evaluatie. Achtereenvolgens worden behandeld: de achtergrond van de wet en drie thema’s die in de evaluatie centraal stonden, te weten de implementatie, het gebruik en de werking van de verwijsindex. We sluiten af met een beschouwing over de toekomstbestendigheid van de landelijke verwijsindex en betrekken hierbij ook de reactie van de staatssecretaris van VWS uit december 2020.

Sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog heeft de Nederlandse overheid allerlei collectieve schaderegelingen gemaakt. Het overgrote deel van deze schaderegelingen wordt uit de publieke middelen gefinancierd. In een onlangs verschenen onderzoek worden de 44 Nederlandse regelingen voor collectieve schade geanalyseerd. De algemene uitkomst is dat veel van deze regelingen hun doel voorbijschieten. Ze zijn niet goed doordacht en onvoldoende uitgewerkt. Ook geven ze slachtoffers lang niet altijd voldoende erkenning voor wat hun is overkomen. In dit artikel wordt ingegaan op het in het onderzoek gehanteerde beoordelingskader en op de schaderegelingen die werden ingesteld naar aanleiding van seksueel misbruik en geweld in de jeugdzorg. Geconcludeerd wordt dat hier wel geheel of gedeeltelijk gecompenseerd werd, maar dat slachtoffers slechts deels erkenning en genoegdoening kregen. In deze schaderegelingen zaten weeffouten die in de toekomst moeten worden vermeden. Algemene lessen voor de toekomst zijn om beter te luisteren en zo veel mogelijk aan te sluiten bij wat slachtoffers wensen, om de uitvoering van een collectieve schaderegeling niet louter bureaucratisch en formalistisch te doen verlopen, om ruimte te creëren waardoor uitzonderingen mogelijk zijn ten faveure van de slachtoffers, en om de uitvoering te monitoren en collectieve schaderegelingen periodiek te evalueren.

In the Dutch public debate on honour-based violence on a regular basis this question is raised: should a special article be introduced for criminalising honour-based violence? However, it is striking that in this debate until now not much attention has been paid towards the different roles of family members in these violent conflicts. The main focus has always been on the so-called ‘material offender’, i.e. the offender that commits or threatens to commit a violent act. But what about family members that play a role in instigating this violence, the so-called ‘intellectual offenders’? In this article it is stated that in the Dutch context we should focus less on the introduction of new articles for punishing honour-based violence in the penal code and make better use of already existing laws and legal framework for addressing these severe violent acts.

Penal protection orders (PPOs) aim to protect initial victims from repeat victimisation and in a broader sense from any danger for his or her dignity or psychological and sexual integrity and may therefore be important instruments for victim safety. However, knowledge on the actual practice of the PPOs and the successes, dilemmas and challenges involved is scarce. In this article, we describe the legal framework and actual enforcement practice of Dutch PPOs. The theoretical framework leading our explorative analyses regards Lipsky’s notion of ‘street-level bureaucracy’ and the succeeding work of Maynard & Musheno and Tummers on coping strategies and agency narratives of frontline workers. Using interview data from criminal justice professionals, victims and offenders, we describe the conditions of the enforcement practice and answer the question which coping mechanisms and types of agencies the professionals tend to apply in order to meet the legislative aims and to protect victims as effectively as possible. Results show that the five conditions described by Lipsky are clearly present. So far, in almost all situations the process of monitoring violations is reactive and because knowledge on risk indicators for violent escalation is still limited, it is difficult for frontline workers to decide how many and what type of resources should be invested in which cases. This results in a ‘moving away from clients’ strategy. However, within this context in which reactive enforcement is the default, we also found several examples of coping that represent ‘moving towards clients’ strategies.

#MeToo is a social movement that started on social media and spread from the US all over the world in 2017. The social movement behind #MeToo is characterised by publicly naming and shaming those who exhibit everyday misconduct in the workplace. This is done by spreading naming and shaming stories via Twitter messages. A question that arises here is whether naming and shaming is a suitable and successful tool for a political movement that aims to bring about social change with regard to sexual violence. Has #MeToo changed the social perspective on sexual violence and social norms of behaviour for sexual encounters? To answer these questions, first a historical sketch of the feminist movements against sexual violence will be provided. What is characteristic of these movements and what are possible parallels with the #MeToo movement? From a feminist perspective, are there any dilemmas that a judicial response to sexual violence entails? In order to provide background to these insights, the characteristics of the #MeToo movement, and the associated dilemmas surrounding naming and shaming, will be discussed next. Finally, it will be discussed if #MeToo has led to social changes.

Crime victims have gained a stronger position in all phases of the criminal procedure, including the post-sentencing phase. It is in this phase specifically that victims’ needs and interests relating to acknowledgement interplay with the offenders’ needs and interests relating to resocialisation. In the Netherlands, offenders who suffer from a mental disorder at the time of the offence limiting their criminal accountability and pose a significant safety threat, can be given a TBS order. This means that they are placed in a forensic psychiatric hospital to prevent further crimes and receive treatment aimed at resocialisation. As resocialisation requires the offender to return to society, contact with the victim might be a necessary step. This article focuses on victim-offender contact during the execution of this TBS order, and looks at risks and opportunities of victim-offender contact in this context, given the particular offender population. Offenders are divided into three groups: those with primarily psychotic disorders, those suffering from personality disorders and those with comorbidity, especially substance abuse disorders. The TBS population is atypical compared to offenders without a mental disorder. Their disorders can heighten the risks of unsuccessful or even counterproductive victim-offender contact. Yet, carefully executed victim-offender contact which includes thorough preparation, managing expectations and choosing the right type of contact can contribute to both successful resocialisation as well as victim acknowledgement.

In toenemende mate worden dergelijke zaken geduid als femicide, breed gedefinieerd als het doden van vrouwen om hun gender. Deze term werd in de eerste instantie in gebruik genomen door organisaties en activisten die zich inzetten voor vrouwenrechten, om aandacht te vragen voor geweld tegen vrouwen. In toenemende mate wordt echter ook in beleid en wetgeving deze term gehanteerd. De vraag is in hoeverre di teen bruikbare term is voor de aanpak van de problematiek die eraan ten grondslag is.

De vanzelfsprekendheid waarmee in huidige internationale instrumenten en zelfs nationale parlementaire stukken geweld tegen vrouwen wordt gekoppeld aan emancipatiebeleid en patriarchale machtsverhoudingen, verhult dat achter dit besef een jarenlange maatschappelijke, politieke en juridische strijd schuilgaat. Deze bijdrage brengt de ontwikkeling van de opsporing en vervolging van seksueel geweld tegen vrouwen in kaart en reflecteert op de onderliggende redenen die ten grondslag liggen aan de knelpunten die hierbij spelen.

Since the outbreak of the Covid-19 virus in March 2020, there have been concerns worldwide about an increase in domestic violence and child abuse as a result of the measures taken to combat the pandemic. This article is based on a systematic study of the impact of the Covid-19 crisis on the magnitude, nature and severity of domestic violence. A brief overview of the literature is presented as a basis for the assumptions made about a possible increase in domestic violence. The design of the study is discussed as well as the first descriptive results and trends. The authors come to the preliminary conclusion that there is no deviating trend compared to domestic violence reports in 2019, the year prior to the outbreak of the pandemic. The future direction of the research project is also discussed.