De Hoge Raad oordeelt in 2010 dat een strafrechtelijke veroordeling niet per definitie een dringende reden voor ontslag oplevert. Ook in deze situatie moet de dringende reden worden beoordeeld aan de hand van alle omstandigheden van het geval. Sindsdien was de lijn in rechtspraak en literatuur lange tijd dat ontslag (al dan niet op staande voet) wegens een strafbaar feit in de privésfeer pas aan de orde kon zijn als (i) er sprake was van een verband tussen het strafbare feit en het werk van de werknemer en (ii) met het strafbare feit een door de werknemer tegenover zijn werkgever na te leven norm was geschonden.
Dit artikel gaat in op de vraag in hoeverre uit recente rechtspraak kan worden afgeleid dat in de privésfeer gepleegde stafbare feiten anno 2022 direct dan wel indirect kunnen leiden tot ontslag. Gelden de twee cumulatieve voorwaarden nog? Om deze vragen te beantwoorden, geven de auteurs een analyse van (de ontwikkelingen in) de gepubliceerde rechtspraak over dit onderwerp sinds de inwerkingtreding van de Wwz. De auteurs maken onderscheid tussen de twee ontslagroutes: ontslag op staande voet en ontbinding van de arbeidsovereenkomst door de kantonrechter.
Op basis hiervan concluderen de auteurs dat de relatie tussen een in de privésfeer gepleegd strafbaar feit en het werk – in lijn met het Hoge Raad arrest – nog steeds een drempel is die moet worden genomen om tot het oordeel te komen dat sprake is van een rechtsgeldig gegeven ontslag op staande voet. In ontbindingszaken wordt de voornoemde toets van de Hoge Raad niet (langer) strikt toegepast bij de beoordeling of een in de privésfeer gepleegd strafbaar feit kan leiden tot ontslag.
De auteurs sluiten af met enkele aanbevelingen voor de praktijk.

The Supreme Court has decided that the summary dismissal of an employee for violating a Covid-19 quarantine order by appearing at work is effective and justified.

Background: In 2018 the Council of Europe issued recommendations on parenthood and detention. However, children and their detained parents still are administratively and socially invisible within the Netherlands.
Method: We conducted a scoping review of the literature on the largest group of detained parents, namely fathers. The goal was to describe what we know about imprisoned fatherhood.We also wanted to determine the focus for follow-up research.
Results: The thematic analysis of the literature reveals four main themes in the research on imprisoned fatherhood . The content analysis results in four recommendations for follow-up research, including qualitative research with incarcerated fathers and their children.

In eleven experiments in Dutch prisons case managers, probation officers and municipality-counselors work together to realize sustainable, integral, continuous reintegration trajectories for detainees. Results show that physical presence of the probation officers in prison improved quick and regular consultation with case managers and other professionals in prison, availability of more and broader information about the detainee, and better preparation for life after prison. Facilitators who supported working and learning together contributed to the co-creation of a new way in organizing the reintegration process in prison. This kind of co-creation requires manpower and resources.

Na de gestrande pogingen van 2013 en 2016-2018 doet het Europees Parlement een nieuwe poging de Europese Commissie zover te krijgen dat zij een wetsvoorstel rond algemene regels van bestuursrecht initieert. Er zijn namelijk voortschrijdende inzichten rond de effecten die digitalisering van overheidsbestuur en de inzet van artificiële intelligentie (AI) daarbij hebben op burgers en organisaties. Daarom is het tijd om na te denken over de beste manier om de betekenis daarvan voor de normering van bestuurlijk handelen zo duidelijk mogelijk te maken voor burgers, organisaties en het bestuur zelf.

Since 2004, cell sharing in Dutch correctional institutions has increased to nearly 30%. In contrast to many other countries, the use of double cells is a policy measure to cut costs, rather than a measure to deal with overcrowding of correctional institutions. This article examines individuals’ experiences of sharing a cell, and the association between cell sharing, wellbeing, misconduct, and prison climate, using survey data from the Life in Custody Study collected in 2019. The sample comprises 3408 participants (in regular prison regimes, pre-trial detention, and short-stay custody). The results show that most respondents report a good relationship with their cellmate, but still prefer a single cell. There is no evidence for positive effects of cell sharing on the researched domains; some negative effects are found when individuals prefer a single cell or report a poor relationship with their cellmate.

In 2019-2020 werd de Wet afbreking zwangerschap (Wafz) voor de tweede keer geëvalueerd. In hun bijdrage staan de auteurs (die het evaluatieonderzoek uitvoerden) met name stil bij twee belangrijke thema’s van de evaluatie: de reikwijdte van de wet; en besluitvorming over abortus. Hun hoofdconclusie is dat er op dit moment geen aanleiding is de wet als zodanig op de schop te nemen. Niettemin zijn er op korte termijn wel belangrijke reparaties van de Wafz nodig, zoals ten aanzien van de buitengrenzen van de wet en de beraadtermijn.

The regular legal framework in the Netherlands stipulates that criminal cases against young adults are dealt with under adult criminal law. In 2014 the maximum age limit for application of juvenile criminal law was raised to 23 years if the suspect or the circumstances of the offence give reason to do so. This so called ‘adolescent criminal law’ is based on the observation that incomplete neuro-psychosocial development can contribute to the continuation of criminal behaviour. There is lack of clarity in the criterion ‘incomplete development’. Different screening instruments are used. Since development continues, it is more meaningful to ask the question whether and to what extent there is a developmental delay, whether the adolescent can and wants to develop further and whether the treatment and interventions from the juvenile criminal law can be helpful in this regard. This calls for a legal principle of ‘juvenile criminal law unless’.

In deze bijdrage bespreken de auteurs de voorgestelde uitsluitingsgrond in geval van sexting onder jongeren. Zij bespreken de relatie tussen sexting en kinderporno alsmede het beschermd belang. Hoewel de uitzonderingsgrond als positief wordt beschouwd, plaatsen de auteurs enkele kritische kanttekeningen bij de uitsluitingsgrond. Zij laten zich uit over hoe de bestanddelen ‘als leeftijdsgenoot’ en ‘gelijkwaardige situatie’ moeten worden ingevuld. Verder signaleren zij een discrepantie tussen het delict kinderporno en de exceptie voor wat betreft de vaststelling van de leeftijd. Ten slotte bespreken de auteurs of de gelijkwaardige situatie na uitwisseling van de weergaven nog moet bestaan, en hoe moet worden omgegaan met een eventueel verwijderverzoek van de afgebeelde persoon.

The COVID-19 crisis has produced or amplified disruptive processes in societies. This article wants to argue for the fact that we understand the meaning of the COVID-19 crisis only if we relate it to the fundamental vulnerability of modern life and the awareness of vulnerability of whole societies. Vulnerability in modernity are expressions of a reality of freedom that is to some extent considered contingent and therefore unsecured. It is true that law is understood today as the protective power of freedom. The thesis of the article, however, boils down to the fact that the COVID-19 crisis has resulted in a new way of thinking about the protection of freedom. This also means that the principle of solidarity must be assigned a new social role. Individual and societal vulnerability refer thereafter to an interconnectedness, dependency, and a future perspective of freedom margins that, in addition to the moral one, can also indicate a need for legal protection. In this respect, law has not only a function of delimitation, but also one of inclusion.

Dutch prisons are not exempt from incidents. Despite the negative impact of violence on the safety of inmates and the chances of successful reintegration, not much is known about the prevalence of victimization in Dutch prisons and the characteristics of victims. Additionally, previous research has pointed out the overlap between victim status and offender status. In this contribution, the authors will discuss the prevalence of self-reported victimization among Dutch inmates and the characteristics of victims and victim-offenders. Data from 3,485 participants from the Life in Custody Study are used for this purpose.

Dutch mayors play an increasingly prominent role in tackling (organized) crime. However, empirical research into how mayors fulfil this role remains scarce. Based on 23 interviews with nineteen mayors and sixteen municipal officials, this study reveals the different ways in which mayors have given meaning to the administrative approach of outlaw motorcycle gangs (OMCGs) in the period 2012-2017. While the national approach to OMCGs fits within the wider focus in society on prevention and the exclusion of ‘risky groups’, this empirical study shows how mayors give their own effect to this focus at the local level.

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.

The right to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) provides one of the procedural guarantees of access to justice. One of the elements on which access to justice under Article 6 ECHR depends is party resources. The concern for equality of arms is that both parties should be able to effectively argue their case before a court, not being impeded by a lack of resources that undermines the tools of their pleading. Such an equality is subject to case-specific analysis. The Lawrence ruling is a ruling on the compatibility of the regime of recoverability of conditional fee agreement (CFA) additional liabilities under the Access to Justice Act 1999 with Article 6 ECHR. The majority in the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) ruled, under a proportionality test, that there was no infringement of Article 6 ECHR because the introduction of the recoverability of CFA additional liabilities was a necessary measure for England to adopt in the pursuit of access to justice under its margin of appreciation. In this article, I will argue that a more holistic view of the procedural guarantees provided for by Article 6 ECHR is called for to properly assess its infringement, considering mainly the principle of equality of arms. The aim of this article is, therefore, to investigate how the principle of equality of arms should have informed the UKSC’s decision in Lawrence.