Zoekresultaat: 189 artikelen

x
Artikel

Politie en de COVID-19-pandemie in België: impact op het politiewerk, de interne relaties en politie-burgerinteracties

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 1 2022
Trefwoorden COVID-19 regulations, crisis, procedural justice, police legitimacy, self-legitimacy
Auteurs Yinthe Feys
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, the author reflects on the impact of COVID-19 on policing, the relations among police officers and the interactions between police and citizens based on systematic social observations in small to semi-sized local police forces during the pandemic. The article discusses the nature of police work during the crisis and new types of interventions that police officers are confronted with (e.g. curfew controls). Additionally, the impact of the pandemic on the internal and external relations is discussed. Internally, the COVID-19 measures may have an impact on police officers’ possibilities for personal, social interactions among colleagues, which may potentially challenge the solidarity within the police force. Externally, tensions may arise in relations with citizens, partly because of unclear regulations or variable interpretations of those regulations. Those unclear regulations, but also uncertainties concerning one’s own competences and questions regarding the police’s role in enforcing the pandemic regulations, put pressure on the police’s (self-)legitimacy.


Yinthe Feys
Dra. Y. Feys is doctoraatsonderzoeker bij het Institute for International Research on Criminal Policy (IRCP), Vakgroep Criminologie, Strafrecht en Sociaal Recht, Faculteit Recht en Criminologie, Universiteit Gent.
Artikel

A comparative law analysis of no-fault comprehensive compensation funds: international best practice & contemporary applications

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Vergoeding Personenschade, Aflevering 1 2022
Trefwoorden no-fault, alternative compensation system, tort remedies, socio-legal frameworks, access to justice
Auteurs K. Watts
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Compensation funds in different jurisdictions have varying functions and objectives to remedy loss. This doctoral research addresses the significant knowledge gap in relation to no-fault comprehensive compensation funds. These are a single publicly-managed structure that provides a wide, compulsory and complete replacement for tort remedies.
    The research identifies the hallmarks of these funds’ successful establishment, administration, operation and further development. This includes analysis of the functional harms covered, compensation quantum and funding. There is also a novel first principles analysis of the interaction between large funds and human rights law. These analyses inform concrete recommendations for the legislative improvement of existing funds, new funds, and the framework’s application to contemporary liability problems.


K. Watts
K. Watts (PhD in Law) is Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Antwerp.
Peer-reviewed artikel

‘Denkfouten, die heb ik niet’

Aandacht voor de blinde vlek van toezichthouders

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 4 2021
Trefwoorden besluitvorming, bias, blinde vlek, denkfouten, psychologie
Auteurs Tessa Coffeng, Elianne F. van Steenbergen, Femke de Vries e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Een denkfout (of bias) ontstaat wanneer mensen op basis van aannames onbewust een verkeerde conclusie trekken. Onder toezichthouders (Ntotaal = 339) is onderzocht in hoeverre zij een potentiële ‘blinde vlek’ vertonen voor hun eigen denkfouten en hoe deze blinde vlek kan worden beïnvloed. Uit dit onderzoek bleek dat toezichthouders inderdaad inschatten dat denkfouten meer bij anderen voorkomen dan bij henzelf, en dat zelfwaargenomen objectiviteit deze blinde vlek kan vergroten. Ook bleek dat toezichthouders die waakzamer zijn in mindere mate een blinde vlek hebben voor hun eigen denkfouten. Toezichthouders geruststellen over het risico op denkfouten in de besluitvorming maakte hen juist minder waakzaam.


Tessa Coffeng
T. Coffeng, MSc. is promovenda bij de Universiteit Utrecht, toezichthouder bij de Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM) en redacteur van Tijdschrift voor Toezicht.

Elianne F. van Steenbergen
Prof. dr. E.F. van Steenbergen is bijzonder hoogleraar Psychologie van Toezicht aan de Universiteit Utrecht, senior toezichthouder bij de AFM en redacteur van Tijdschrift voor Toezicht.

Femke de Vries
Prof. mr. dr. F. de Vries is bijzonder hoogleraar Toezicht bij de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en managing partner bij &samhoud.

Naomi Ellemers
Prof. dr. N. Ellemers is universiteitshoogleraar aan de Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

Access_open Dividing the Beds: A Risk Community under ‘Code Black’?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Cosmopolitan solidarity, COVID-19, Health care regulation, Risk society, Argumentative discourse analysis
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    During the COVID-19 crisis a risk of ‘code black’ emerged in the Netherlands. Doctors mentioned that in case of code black, very senior citizens might not receive intensive care treatment for COVID-19 due to shortages. Sociologist Ulrich Beck argued that palpable risks lead to the creation of new networks of solidarity. In this article this assumption is investigated by analyzing the different storylines prevalent in the public discussion about ‘code black’. Initially, storylines showing sympathy with the plight of the elderly came to the fore. However, storylines brought forward by medical organizations eventually dominated, giving them the opportunity to determine health care policy to a large extent. Their sway over policymaking led to a distribution scheme of vaccines that was favourable for medical personnel, but unfavourable for the elderly. The discursive process on code black taken as a whole displayed a struggle over favourable risk positions, instead of the formation of risk solidarity.


Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is Assistant Professor of Jurisprudence at Tilburg Law School.
Artikel

Access_open Solidarity, Religious Freedom and COVID-19

The Case of the Ultra-Orthodox Sects in Israel

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Social solidarity, COVID-19, Religious freedom, Cultural defence, Ultra-Orthodox sects in Israel
Auteurs Miriam Gur-Arye en Sharon Shakargy
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article discusses the tension between social solidarity and religious freedom as demonstrated by the refusal of the ultra-Orthodox sects in Israel to comply with COVID-19 regulations. The article provides a detailed description of the refusal to comply with the regulations restricting mass prayer services in synagogues and studying Torah in the yeshivas, thus interfering with the ultra-Orthodox religious life. The article suggests possible explanations for that refusal, based on either religious beliefs or a socio-political claim to autonomy, and discusses whether the polity should be willing to tolerate such a refusal on the basis of the cultural defence. The article concludes that despite the drastic restrictions on religious life caused by the social distancing regulations, and the special importance of freedom of religion, reducing the pandemic’s spread called for awarding priority to solidarity over religious freedom, and the enforcement of social solidarity legal duties – the social distancing regulations – on all.


Miriam Gur-Arye
Miriam Gur-Arye is the Judge Basil Wunsh Professor of Criminal Law, Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Sharon Shakargy
Sharon Shakargy is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Artikel

Access_open Populism, the Kingdom of Shadows, and the Challenge to Liberal Democracy

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Populism, Liberal democracy, Political representation, Société du spectacle, Theatrocracy
Auteurs Massimo La Torre
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Populism is a somehow intractable notion, since its reference is much too wide, comprising phenomena that are indeed in conflict between them, and moreover blurred, by being often used in an instrumental, polemical way. Such intractability is then radicalized through the two alternative approaches to populism, one that is more or less neutral, rooting in the political science tradition, and a second one, fully normative, though fed by political realism, founding as it does on a specific political theory and project. In the article an alternative view is proposed, that of populism as the politics that is congruent with the increasing role played by ‘screens’, icons, and images in social relationships and indeed in political representation. In this way populism is approached as the specific way politics is done within the context of a digitalized société du spectacle.


Massimo La Torre
Massimo La Torre is Professor of Philosophy of Law, ‘Magna Graecia’ University of Catanzaro, Italy, and Visiting Professor of European Law, University of Tallinn, Estonia.
Artikel

Access_open Living with Others in Pandemics

The State’s Duty to Protect, Individual Responsibility and Solidarity

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, The state’s duty to protect, Duty to rescue, Responsibility, Solidarity
Auteurs Konstantinos A Papageorgiou
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article discusses a range of important normative questions raised by anti-COVID-19 measures and policies. Do governments have the right to impose such severe restrictions on individual freedom and furthermore do citizens have obligations vis-à-vis the state, others and themselves to accept such restrictions? I will argue that a democratic state may legitimately enforce publicly discussed, properly enacted and constitutionally tested laws and policies in order to protect its citizens from risks to life and limb. Even so, there is a natural limit, factual and normative, to what the state or a government can do in this respect. Citizens will also need to take it upon themselves not to harm and to protect others and in the context of a pandemic this means that endorsement of restrictions or other mandatory measures, notably vaccination, is not to be seen as a matter of personal preference concerning the supposedly inviolable sovereignty of one’s own body.


Konstantinos A Papageorgiou
Konstantinos A Papageorgiou is Professor of the Philosophy of Law at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Law.
Artikel

Access_open Solidarity and COVID-19

A Foucauldian analysis

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Solidarity, COVID-19 epidemic, Foucault, Social cohesion, Practicing
Auteurs Marli Huijer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, most governments in Europe have imposed disciplinary and controlling mechanisms on their populations. In the name of solidarity, citizens are pressed to submit to lockdowns, social distancing or corona apps. Building on the historical-philosophical studies of Michel Foucault, this article shows that these mechanisms are spin-offs of health regimes that have evolved since the seventeenth century. In case of COVID-19, these regimes decreased the infection, morbidity and mortality rates. But, as a side-effect, they limited the opportunities to act together and practice solidarity. This negatively affected the social cohesion and public sphere in already highly individualistic societies. To prevent the further disappearing of solidarity – understood as something that is enacted rather than as a moral value or political principle – governments and citizens need to invest in the restoral of the social conditions that enable and facilitate the practicing of solidarity after the epidemic.


Marli Huijer
Marli Huijer is Emeritus Professor of Public Philosophy at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Article

Access_open A Comparative Perspective on the Protection of Hate Crime Victims in the European Union

New Developments in Criminal Procedures in the EU Member States

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden hate crime, victims, victim rights, procedural justice, EU Member States, criminal procedure
Auteurs Suzan van der Aa, Robin Hofmann en Jacques Claessen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Hate crime victims involved in a criminal procedure experience difficulties that are different from problems encountered by other victims. In trying to meet the specific procedural needs of hate crime victims many EU Member States have introduced protective measures and services in criminal proceedings, but the adopted approaches are widely disparate. By reporting the results of an EU-wide comparative survey into hate crime victims within national criminal procedures the authors aim to: (1) make an inventory of the national (legal) definitions of hate crime and the protection measures available (on paper) for hate crime victims; and (2) critically discuss certain national choices, inter alia by juxtaposing the procedural measures to the procedural needs of hate crime victims to see if there are any lacunae from a victimological perspective. The authors conclude that the Member States should consider expanding their current corpus of protection measures in order to address some of the victims’ most urgent needs.


Suzan van der Aa
Suzan van der Aa, PhD, is Professor of Criminal Law at Maastricht University, the Netherlands.

Robin Hofmann
Robin Hofmann is Assistant Professor at Maastricht University, the Netherlands.

Jacques Claessen
Jacques Claessen is Professor at Maastricht University, the Netherands.
Article

Access_open Ruled by Fear or Safety-Related Empowerment

The Experience and Meaning of Penal Protection Orders in Intimate Partner Violence in the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden intimate partner violence, stalking, protection orders, empowerment, safety, well-being
Auteurs Irma W.M. Cleven
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This study uses a novel approach to understand the experience and meaning of unsafety and the contribution of penal protection orders to victim empowerment in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV). In ten in-depth interviews, IPV survivors reflect on their relationship with their ex-partner and the previous years in which the order against their ex-partner was issued, including its role within the wider process of coming to terms with IPV victimisation and moving on. Depending on expectations of protection orders (POs) enforcement and deterrence, POs enhance one’s safety-related self-efficacy and result in a sense of empowerment. Its meaning can be understood in terms of one’s power from the ex-partner, power to act, status vis-à-vis the offender and the wider community, care/help of the CJS, and unity/togetherness with the wider community. Several implications for theoretical and empirical research and practice are discussed.


Irma W.M. Cleven
Irma W.M. Cleven, MSc, is PhD Candidate at the Department of Criminology of the Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Article

Access_open Dutch Penal Protection Orders in Practice

A Study of Aims and Outcomes

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden enforcement practice, victim safety, street level bureaucracy, criminal justice chain, penal protection orders
Auteurs Tamar Fischer en Sanne Struijk
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    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.


Tamar Fischer
Tamar Fischer is Associate Professor of Criminology at the Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Sanne Struijk
Sanne Struijk is Professor of Penal Sanctions Law and associate professor of Criminal Law at the Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Sanne Struijk
Sanne Struijk is Professor of Penal Sanctions Law, Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and also Endowed Professor Penology and Penitentiary Law, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Article

Access_open How Do Victims With the Need for Protection Judge Their Experiences With the Police in the Netherlands?

An Exploration

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden victim needs, protection, reasons to report, contribution to safety, police information, victim-offender relationship
Auteurs Annemarie ten Boom
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article presents a preliminary analysis of how victims who report to the police for protection in the Netherlands judge their experiences with the police, in comparison with victims reporting crimes for other reasons. An existing dataset was used: the data was originally collected for a comprehensive survey among crime victims of 12 years and older in 2016. Female victims of violent (sexual and non-sexual) crimes constitute the major part of the victims for whom protection is the most important reporting reason. Victim perceptions of police contribution to safety as well as police information were investigated. The analyses show that overall, victim perceptions of the police’s contribution to safety are rather negative. Contribution to safety is judged somewhat better by victims for whom protection is their most important reporting reason; however, the respondents who are positive still form a minority. Police information is judged positively by more victims than contribution to safety. Of the respondents for whom protection is a reporting reason, victims of sexual crimes appear to judge police information positively more often than victims of other crime types.


Annemarie ten Boom
Annemarie ten Boom, PhD, was a researcher at the WODC, Ministry of Justice and Security in the Netherlands until February 2022.
Artikel

Over schade en schande

Shaming en stigmatisering van ondernemingen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden naming and shaming, organisatiecriminaliteit, stigma, reputatie, Shell
Auteurs Judith van Erp
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Naming-and-shaming campaigns, in which civil society groups publicly call upon corporations to end harmful behavior via social media, are a powerful mechanism for social control of corporations. This article investigates naming and shaming in modern, global markets through a case study of Shell - one of the most stigmatized corporations of our time. First, the perspective of organizational sociology is used to answer the question why Shell is receiving such significant attention. Next, the article addresses how shaming manifests itself in global markets. The example of Shell illustrates reintegrative shaming, aiming to end harmful activities, as well as stigmatizing shaming that undermines a corporation’s license to operate.
    Finally, this article discusses the potential consequences of naming and shaming for corporate reputations. In the case of Shell, Goffman’s concept of courtesy stigma appears to form the greatest reputational risk, as stigmatization of Shells business partners will create status anxiety and will limit opportunities to develop business.


Judith van Erp
Prof. dr. Judith van Erp bekleedt de leerstoel ‘Regulatory Governance’ aan de Universiteit Utrecht, binnen het departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap. j.g.vanerp@uu.nl
Article

Access_open Victim-Offender Contact in Forensic Mental Health

Resocialisation and Victim Acknowledgement During the Execution of the Dutch TBS Order

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden victim-offender contact, resocialisation, victim acknowledgement, forensic psychiatry, mentally disordered offenders
Auteurs Lydia Dalhuisen en Alice Kirsten Bosma
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    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.


Lydia Dalhuisen
Lydia Dalhuisen, PhD, is Assistant Professor at the Utrecht University, the Netherlands.

Alice Kirsten Bosma
Alice Kirsten Bosma is Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law of Tilburg University, the Netherlands.

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that ‘gender critical’ beliefs are protected philosophical beliefs for equality law purposes, while confirming that a belief in ‘gender identity’ is also a protected characteristic. This means that it is unlawful to discriminate against someone because they do or do not hold either of those beliefs.


Bethan Carney
Bethan Carney is a Managing Practice Development Lawyer, Lewis Silkin LLP.
Artikel

Gemeentelijke juridische professionals in ­verandering

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Legal professionals, Professional posture, professional role, Willingness to change
Auteurs Arnt Mein
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Legal professionals working in city and municipal government face changes in expectations about their roles within the organisation. Where in the past they mostly took on the reactive and detached role of guardians of legal quality, these days they are expected to take a more flexible, solution-oriented and cooperative stance. How do these legal professionals handle this shift? How far do they go in adapting and which factors play a role? Based on three different positions within the organisation I describe this process, focusing in particular on their perception of their professional roles, and their willingness to change. I conclude with some critical comments on the changing expectations from legal professionals.


Arnt Mein
Arnt Mein is Lector Legal Management aan de Hogeschool van Amsterdam. Hij doet onderzoek naar onder meer de juridische functie bij de overheid en de beroepshouding van juristen.
Artikel

Constructief omgaan met conflicten en ­geschillen

Inleiding in probleemoplossend onderhandelen en bemiddelen

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2 2021
Auteurs Alain-Laurent Verbeke en Geert Vervaeke
Auteursinformatie

Alain-Laurent Verbeke
Prof. Dr. Alain-Laurent Verbeke (1964) is gewoon hoogleraar aan de KU Leuven. Hij doceert er sinds 1991 onder meer onderhandelen en bemiddelen, nationaal en internationaal familiaal vermogensrecht, bijzondere overeenkomsten, zowel in de bachelor en master rechten als in de master notariaat. Aan de rechtsfaculteit is hij directeur van het Rector Roger Dillemans Instituut Familiaal Vermogensrecht, codirecteur van het Leuvens Centrum Notariaat en van het Instituut Contractenrecht. Aan de faculteit psychologie is hij covoorzitter van het Leuven Center for Collaborative Management (LCM). Hij is mede-oprichter (in 2001), lesgever en lid van de stuurgroep van het postgraduaat bemiddeling van de KU Leuven. Ook is hij (co)promotor van talrijke doctoraten, in de rechten en in de psychologie. Hij is advocaat aan de balies van Brussel en West-Vlaanderen, partner Greenille Private Client Team @ Deloitte Legal. Hij is sinds 2007 Visiting Professor of Law aan Harvard Law School, waar hij negotiation doceert. Sinds 2008 is hij ook Professor of Law & Negotiation aan UCP Lisbon Global School of Law en sinds 1999 deeltijds gewoon hoogleraar privaatrecht en rechtsvergelijking aan Tilburg University. Hij ontving de Francqui Leerstoel (VUB, 2010-2011), de KBC Chair in Family Wealth (Antwerp Management School, 2014-2015) en de Van Oosterwyck Leerstoel notarieel recht (VUB, 2003). In Harvard is hij verbonden aan het Program on Negotiation (PON). Zie www.law.kuleuven.be/fvr/nl/pdf/cvALV.

Geert Vervaeke
Prof. Dr. Geert Vervaeke (1960) is Decaan van de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van Tilburg University. Hij is tevens deeltijds Gewoon Hoogleraar aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de KU Leuven in de criminologische en rechtspsychologie. Momenteel is hij voorzitter van de European Association on Psychology and Law (https://eapl.eu). Tevens is hij voorzitter van de stuurgroep van het postgraduaat bemiddeling aan de KU Leuven. Hij is gewezen Voorzitter van de Belgische Hoge Raad voor de Justitie (2004-2012: www.hrj.be/nl). Hij was tussen 2004 en 2012 tevens lid van het bestuur van het Europees Netwerk van Hoge Raden (www.encj.eu) en curator van het wetenschappelijk luik van het Stadsfestival Op.Recht.Mechelen (2015-2017: www.oprechtmechelen.be).
Artikel

Access_open GMO Regulation in Crisis – The Experimental Potential of Regulation (EU) 2020/1043 on Covid-19 in Addressing Both a Crisis and a ­Pandemic

Special Issue Experimental Legislation in Times of Crisis Sofia Ranchordás & Bart van Klink (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, september 2021
Trefwoorden experimental legislation, regulatory knowledge, GMO regulation, evaluation
Auteurs Lonneke Poort en Willem-Jan Kortleven
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, we analyse Regulation (EU) 2020/1043 on Covid-19 against the backdrop of the current deadlock in EU-regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). We build on temporary and experimental legislation scholarship and employ a normative framework of regulatory knowledge. The Covid-19 Regulation aims at speeding up the development of GMO-based Covid-19 treatments or vaccines by temporarily suspending requirements that otherwise would have made for time-consuming and burdensome authorization processes. Although the Regulation lacks an explicit experimental purpose, we hypothesize that experiences with its functioning may be utilized in evaluation processes serving attempts to change the GMO legal framework. As such, it may fulfil a latent experimental function. We reflect on the types of knowledge that are relevant when evaluating experimental legislation and developing regulation more generally and argue that the inclusion of social knowledge is pertinent in dealing with complex issues such as GMO regulation. Experimental law literature focuses on gathering evidence-based knowledge about the functioning of legislation but virtually neglects knowledge about different experiences and value appreciations of various societal actors and social-contextual mechanisms. We propose that such social knowledge be included in the design of experimental legislation and that evaluation be approached bottom-up instead of top-down.


Lonneke Poort
Lonneke Poort is Associate Professor at the department of Sociology, Theory and Methodology of Law at Erasmus School of Law.

Willem-Jan Kortleven
Willem-Jan Kortleven is Assistant Professor at the department of Sociology, Theory and Methodology of Law at Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Toont 1 - 20 van 189 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
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.