The aim of the present research was to gain insight into the topic of ‘task-related rule-breaking behavior’ (TRB) among Dutch police officers. TRB is a more refined alternative for the concept of noble cause corruption and has been defined as: police officers breaking rules or formal agreements for the purpose of acting in a manner that contributes to the lawful police task. Qualitative research has been conducted within one of the ten regional police forces in the Netherlands. Results show that TRB appears to be a relatively common phenomenon during policework. Behaviors are categorized in sixteen categories and five overarching outlines. In addition, attention is given to several important factors that could be related to TRB being distinguishable between police officers’ individual responsibility and organizational factors. To handle TRB, it is recommended to pay attention to the police officers’ approach of judging and rationalizing their own behavior, their level of knowledge, and social skills. Furthermore, organizational structure (i.e., spam of control) and police leadership may, among other factors, play an important role in encouraging TRB. Especially the way supervisors deal with police officers’ professional autonomy needs specific attention in order to reduce TRB. Autonomy needs guidance in the form of clear orders followed by feedback and coaching. Also, an active form of ethical leadership is needed. An action framework is presented that could be helpful to supervisors to judge and thereby reduce forms of TRB.

A forensic mental health report is requested in about 30% of more serious cases presented to the criminal court. These reports can be used at sentencing and advise the judge on criminal responsibility, recidivism risk, and possible treatment measures, but is not a formal factor in decisions about guilt. The current study focuses on the (unwarranted) effect of forensic mental health information on conviction decisions. Using an experimental vignette study among 155 criminology students, results show that when a mental disorder is present, conviction rates are higher than when such information is absent. In line with the story model of judicial decision-making, additional analyses showed that this effect was mediated by the evaluation of guilt rather than by the evaluation of other physical evidence. Implications for further research and practice are discussed.

In this contribution, the authors enter into a debate on the innovation The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary made quite recently, promoting social effective justice (maatschappelijk effectieve rechtspraak;to English readers more familiar under the label of ‘Problem solving courts’).
Klijn has quite serious doubts about this strategy. First of all: the judge is not - and never has been - a problem solver, as (a) the judge lacks the competences to do so and (b) the structure of legal procedure falls fundamentally short of this task. Secondly, in our contemporary society other professionals are in charge of intervening in social conflicts, and they are much better positioned to do so, at the appropriate moment in time. Thirdly, in making this choice the Council misunderstands its role as the Third State Power, vis-a-vis the much greater influence of changing societal conditions stimulating societal changes.

Hartendorp emphasizes in his contribution that a judge is a decision-maker bound by the law. He agrees with Klijn that this position makes it difficult to act as a problem solver. However, this does not alter the fact that, in order to act effectively, a judge must have a dual orientation on the conflict and the dispute between the parties. The Judiciary can only increase its social effectiveness if it manages to bring about a synthesis between its classic decisive task and an orientation aimed at effectiveness.

Few legal theorists today would argue that the domain of law exists in isolation from other normative spheres governing society, notably from the domain of ‘politics’. Nevertheless, the implicit norm that judges should not act ‘politically’ remains influential and widespread in the debates surrounding controversial court cases. This article aims to square these two observations. Taking the Miller v. Secretary of State and Urgenda cases as illustrative case studies, the article demonstrates that what it means for judges to adjudicate cases ‘apolitically’ is itself a matter of controversy. In reflecting on their own constitutional role, courts are forced to take a stance on substantive questions of political philosophy. Nevertheless, that does not mean that the ‘norm of judicial apoliticality’ should therefore be rejected. The norm’s coherence lies in its intersocial function: its role in declaring certain modes of judicial interpretation and intervention legitimate (‘legal’/‘judicial’) or illegitimate (‘political’).

In the last decade neuropsychological insights have gained influence with regard to age boundaries in legal procedures, however, in Dutch civil law no such influence can be distinguished. Recently, voices have been raised to improve children’s legal position in civil law: to reflect upon the minimum age limit of twelve years for children to be invited to be heard in court and the need for children to have a stronger procedural position.
In this article, first the current legal position of children in Dutch law and practice will be analysed. Second, development of psychological constructs relevant for family law will be discussed in relation to underlying brain developmental processes and contextual effects. These constructs encompass cognitive capacity, autonomy, stress responsiveness and (peer) pressure.
From the first part it becomes clear that in Dutch family law, there is a tortuous jungle of age limits, exceptions and limitations regarding children’s procedural rights. Until recently, the Dutch government has been reluctant to improve the child’s procedural position in family law. Over the last two years, however, there has been an inclination towards further reflecting on improvements to the child’s procedural rights, which, from a children’s rights perspective, is an important step forward. Relevant neuropsychological insights support improvements for a better realisation of the child’s right to be heard, such as hearing children younger than twelve years of age in civil court proceedings.

This article delineates the problem of judicial subjectivity in so-called ‘hard cases’. Decisions in such cases are essentially decisions of conscience, which in principle can escape the control mechanisms of objectivation and justification. This leads to the question as to the attributes of a good judge.

This article outlines two points of criticism related to Christopher Marshall’s discussion of a relational justice of care. First, addressing the needs of the parties involved in a criminal justice case finds its appropriate place in the post-trial stage. In the pre-trial and trial stages, protecting the legal rights and equal treatment of suspects should take priority over caring for suspects. Secondly, if the outcome of the restorative encounter in the pre-trial stages has a bearing on the verdict of the judge, the encounter may risk to lose its authenticity. The offender may have reason to believe that a socially appropriate performance will be rewarded with less punishment.

Met de inwerkingtreding van de Wet normalisering rechtspositie ambtenaren op 1 januari 2020 hebben de meeste overheidssectoren de overstap gemaakt naar het cao-stelsel. De Ambtenarenwet 2017 bevat geen wettelijke grondslag meer voor een regeling ter beslechting van collectieve arbeidsconflicten. In de ambtelijke cao’s keert de (Lokale) Advies- en Arbitragecommissie (AAC) terug in de vorm van een derdeninterventieclausule. In deze bijdrage wordt ingegaan op de rol van de AAC voor en na 1 januari 2020, mede in het licht van de wijze waarop derdeninterventie bij cao-conflicten gestalte heeft gekregen in de marktsector. Ook wordt de vraag gesteld of de wijze waarop een voorziening ter beslechting van collectieve arbeidsgeschillen is verwezenlijkt, invloed heeft op het collectief actierecht. Daarbij spreekt de auteur een sterke voorkeur uit voor (her)invoering van een wettelijke grondslag voor een geschillenregeling voor sectoren die essentiële diensten leveren, zowel in de publieke als in de private sector.

De huidige technologische ontwikkelingen op het terrein van de voertuigautomatisering stellen het bestaande publiekrechtelijk reguleringsinstrumentarium op de proef. Daarbij spelen met name de snelheid van de ontwikkelingen, de onzekerheid over de veiligheidseffecten en de nieuwsoortige aard van de technologie en de daaraan verbonden risico’s een rol. Een van de vragen die daarbij rijst, is die naar het potentieel van het aansprakelijkheidsrecht om als aanvullend of substituut-reguleringsinstrument te fungeren. Het antwoord op die vraag is, in ieder geval in theorie, positief.

In our daily decision-making processes, attitudes play an important role. An attitude is an evaluative judgement of a person, object or an issue on a scale of favorability. A large amount of research has been done on the role of attitudes in our daily decision-making processes. There is, however, a gap in empirical knowledge when it concerns the role of attitudes in the professional judicial decision-making process. It has been accepted that the professional judicial decision-making process has a subjective element, but this subjective element remains unexplained. Attitudes are inherently personal and subjective, and they can make our decision-making process easier. They can, however, also be the basis for biases and prejudices. Herein lies a potential risk, especially in the professional judicial decision-making process. If attitudes play a role in the decision-making process of judges there is a possibility that impartiality, one of the judiciary’s core professional values, might be unobtainable. To see whether attitudes play a role in the professional judicial decision-making process semi-structured interviews will be conducted among judges, who will also be asked to fill in a scenario survey. Hopefully the obtained data will lead to a start in filling this gap in empirical knowledge.

Opsporingsdiensten moeten vaak geheimhouderstukken filteren uit grote hoeveelheden data. Auteurs bespreken de uitgangspunten en relevante opsporingsbelangen bij een dergelijke ‘schoning’. Artikel 98 Sv en artikel 126aa Sv vullen die uitgangspunten en belangen verschillend in. Machine learning is in staat om op basis van objectief gekozen startsets de schoning (deels) geautomatiseerd uit te voeren. Deze methode voorkomt dat opsporingsambtenaren onnodig kennisnemen van de inhoud van geheimhouderstukken en zorgt dat het opsporingsonderzoek niet onnodig vertraagt. Auteurs presenteren de eerste resultaten van een dergelijke schoning in Nederland, en bespreken hoe machine learning ook in het huidig wettelijk kader kan worden ingepast.

Ever since it was published in 2015, the judgment of the The Hague court in the so-called Urgenda-case, and the subsequent decisions of the appellate and cassation courts confirming it, have been met with repeated and vivid critiques. By recognizing the necessity of the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and furthermore imposing a certain reduction level on the Dutch state, the judgments in the cases at hand gave rise to many questions concerning the position of the judiciary in the matter, and in Dutch society as a whole. This article attempts in the first place to situate the positions of the different actors intervening in the Urgenda-case within a legal-theoretical framework. The contribution subsequently explores the strategic possibilities that an alternative understanding of law could offer to the judges, focusing specifically on the use of legal instruments stemming from international law, brought into the reasoning of the national judge.

Met de aanname van het Jeugddelinquentiedecreet, bepaalt Vlaanderen de richting die het wil uitgaan in het omgaan met personen die op minderjarige leeftijd strafbare feiten plegen of hiervan verdacht worden. Zo ambieerde Vlaanderen onder meer zich ‘internationaal als goede praktijk in de aanpak van jeugddelinquentie te profileren’. Deze bijdrage gaat vanuit een kinderrechtenperspectief na in welke mate het nieuwe Vlaamse decreet deze internationale ambitie waar maakt.

Het VN-Kinderrechtencomité heeft recentelijk zijn nieuwe General Comment No. 24 gepubliceerd over kinderrechten in het jeugdstrafrecht. Deze bijdrage verkent de mogelijke implicaties van dit General Comment voor het Nederlandse jeugdstrafrecht, aan de hand van interviews met professionals uit de jeugdstrafrechtspraktijk. Hierbij wordt specifiek aandacht besteed aan de minimumleeftijdsgrens voor jeugdstrafrechtelijke aansprakelijkheid en de buitengerechtelijke afdoening van jeugdstrafzaken (‘diversion’). Ook wordt in bredere zin gereflecteerd op de potentiële meerwaarde van het IVRK en General Comment No. 24 voor het Nederlandse jeugdstrafrecht.