In the corona period, phenomena such as disinformation and conspiracy activism have taken on a greater and more disturbing significance. This article provides a first problem picture of current manifestations in the broader social context and offers tentative explanations. It looks in turn at who makes and distributes the fake news, what role conspiracy activism plays in this, what is known about social receptivity, and what the implications are for law enforcement and security. Finally, an action perspective is presented.

With the Modernisation of the Code of Criminal Procedure, certain digital investigation powers will for the first time be given a specific statutory basis, such as the search of data carriers, open-source investigation and network searches. Nevertheless, considering the high degree of intrusiveness of such techniques, particularly with the right to privacy, it remains important to take note of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, which continues to set minimum safeguards for the interference with private life. In this paper, we therefore conduct a brief overview of recent ECtHR case law concerning five types of digital investigation powers. We then consider the implications of this case law for the regulation of such powers in the draft Code of Criminal Procedure and for the Modernisation process more broadly.

In deze bijdrage bespreekt de auteur de vraag in hoeverre bij een internationale nalatenschap voor verwerping, respectievelijk aanvaarding van een making onder voorwaarde of last namens een minderjarige erfgenaam machtiging van de kantonrechter is vereist. Als eerste wordt de kwalificatievraag beantwoord, te weten dat hier sprake is van een kwestie betreffende ouderlijke verantwoordelijkheid/kinderbescherming en niet van een kwestie van erfopvolging. Vervolgens gaat de auteur, mede aan de hand van de bespreking van een negental rechterlijke uitspraken, in op de internationale bevoegdheid van de Nederlandse rechter en het op het machtigingsverzoek toepasselijke recht.

Het Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens (EHRM of Hof) heeft in de periode september 2020 tot en met augustus 2021 verschillende uitspraken gedaan over mensenrechtelijke vragen op het snijvlak met het gezondheidsrecht. Veel van deze uitspraken borduren voort op eerdere jurisprudentie van het Hof, maar er zijn ook uitspraken over nieuwe onderwerpen, waaronder over COVID-19, de rechten van psychiatrische patiënten, huiselijk geweld en kindermishandeling alsmede over vaccineren.

De conclusie van het eerste evaluatieonderzoek van de Wet verplichte meldcode is dat met de invoering van een meldcode de eerste stappen zijn gezet richting een ondersteuningsmodel voor professionals om signalen van huiselijk geweld en kindermishandeling te herkennen en hen handvatten te bieden om sneller en adequater hulp te bieden.

This article examines how Spanish and Catalan laws deal with claims of grandparents who seek contact with their grandchildren against the will of one or both parents, and the scope given to their rights. It starts by explaining the content and the goals of the legal reforms enacted in Spain at the beginning of the 21st century to promote grandparents’ interests. Then, it presents the case law developed in the interpretation of the relevant legal rules. The resulting state of the law is assessed, taking into account the interests of all the parties involved (parents, grandparents, and grandchildren). The experience of more than twenty years of application of the specific provisions concerning grandparents’ contact rights sheds light on the impact of giving grandparents stronger legal rights. However, it also prompts the question of whether this legislative choice might have brought about useless and potentially harmful litigation.

This is a letter written by Brigitte Chin-A-Fat to the late Peter Hoefnagels, who was one of the Dutch pioneers in the field of divorce mediation and a professor of criminology and family law at Erasmus University Rotterdam. In 1997, TMD published an article from his hand in which he wrote how he had become inspired by the potential of divorce mediation and about his (first) experiences with this ‘new’ mode of dispute resolution in family disputes. The original article by Peter Hoefnagels, dating from 1997, is reproduced in 2021 in TMD in view of its relevance today and precedes the letter by Brigitte Chin-A-Fat.
Hoefnagels invented the so-called ‘divorce announcement’ and introduced psychology to the legal world of divorce and family mediation. Anno 2021, there are many (legal) developments which are bound to have an impact on the reform of Dutch divorce procedure.
The Dutch government has set up pilot projects experimenting with inter alia a ‘joint access’ to the family court. Many of these developments are in line with Hoefnagels’ suggestions to avoid harm being inflicted on the ex-spouses and notably their children to the largest extent possible. The author discusses some of the current pilot projects and connects the rationale underlying these experiments to Hoefnagels’ ideas as presented 25 years ago. She also looks into the future, notably which changes are likely to occur in the next 25 years in the field of divorce mediation.