In this article we study a case of responsive law, i.e. the Dutch Social Support Act, which entails the open norm to provide tailored support as the antithesis of universal ‘one-size-fits-all-solutions’. Rather than assessing clients’ needs based on check lists, street-level bureaucrats are expected to jointly explore fitting solutions in dialogue with citizens during a so-called kitchen table talk. The space to tailor support to the individual situation, however, creates ambiguity about the interpretation of this open norm and conflicting expectations with regard to stakeholders’ roles. This role-ambiguity is not only situated in the interaction between professional and citizen at the kitchen table, but is nested in a multi-actor network of policy makers, frontline workers, clients of social support, lawyers and judges. In this article we zoom in on this network to investigate how multiple stakeholders cope with ambiguity regarding the interpretation of the open norm and each other’s roles. The conducted qualitative study (observations, interviews and document analysis) provides revealing insights into the strategies employed by multiple actors when role-ambiguity emerges, including strategies of standardization, proto professionalization and objectification. These strategies cannot be seen in isolation from one another and their interaction results in the unintended effect of more rules and administrative burden and less discretionary space for tailored support. Based on these findings we argue that mutual trust and insights into the various roles within this network is of great importance in order to prevent rule-reflex. In addition, professionals should be better equipped to conduct open dialogues about what constitutes appropriate support with the client. Finally, sufficient financial leeway is needed for municipalities so that they are not forced to constantly seek the legal boundaries of what can be regarded as the minimum variant of social support.

In this contribution we investigated:

1. What changes in the handling of immigration law suits has the corona pandemic led to?

2. What influence have these changes had on the role of first-line migra­tion judges?

   1. Has their working method been adjusted as a result of the corona measures? If so, does this still fit in their view and that of the parties to the proceedings within the requirements of a fair trial and the professional standards that apply to judges?

   2. Do the changes in working ­methods require different skills from migration judges?

   3. Are the changes in the handling of cases and the way of working, temporary or permanent?

This special issue focuses on the role concept, which has largely fallen out of use in sociology, but which seems ideally suited to analyze the circumstances in which legal professionals work nowadays. Their occupations are often surrounded by constitutional guarantees and professional standards, but at the same time in full swing due to policy reforms referred to as New Public Management and Socially Effective Judiciary (Maatschappelijk Effectieve Rechtspraak). This combination of relative role stability and rapid change can ensure that the predictability and desirability of the interpretation attributed to professional roles become subject of discussion and reflection. The way the role concept is used in this special issue is deliberately decoupled from the much-criticized structural functionalism with which it is often associated. The fact that this sociological perspective has lost much of its sway since the 1960s, because of its conservative character, makes it easier to give dynamics, ambiguity, conflict and resistance a prominent place in contemporary analyzes in which the role concept is central. The authors in this special issue examine whether the role fulfillment by professionals working in the legal field is actually subject of discussion and reflection and how this dynamic manifests itself.

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.

Wanneer een vader een vrijheidsstraf krijgt heeft dit veelal grote impact op betrokken vaderschap. De Raad van Europa vroeg in 2018 aandacht voor het thema omdat bewustwording van vaderschap in de strafrechtsketen leed en risico kan voorkomen in gezinnen van gedetineerden. Wij onderzochten in hoeverre er in Nederland gezinsgericht gewerkt wordt in de straftoemeting met betrekking tot verdachte mannen. We concluderen dat in zittingen meer aandacht besteed moet worden aan de rol van de verdachte man binnen zijn gezin.

The COVID-19 pandemic swept the world in 2020 impelling us to reconsider the basic principles of constitutional law like the separation of power, the rule of law, human rights protection, etc. The two most pressing legal issues that have attracted the attention of legal scholars so far are, on the one hand, the different regulatory policies implemented by governments and, on the other, the balance among the branches of government in deciding matters of the emergency. The pandemic has determined a further and violent acceleration of the legislature’s temporal dimension and the acknowledgement that, to make legislation quicker, parliament must permanently displace its legislative power in favour of government. Measures adopted to tackle the outbreak and recover from the interruption of economic and industrial businesses powerfully confirm that today our societies are more dependent on the executives than on parliaments and, from a temporal perspective, that the language of the law is substantially the present instead of the future. Against this background, this article discusses how the prevalence of governments’ legislative power leads to the use of temporary and experimental legislation in a time, like the pandemic, when the issue of ‘surviving’ becomes dominant.

Contemporary critical analyses of legal education indicate that legal education is undemocratic as it is based on a discipline that produces subjects who obey hierarchies, are free from the habit of criticism and are ready to self-sacrifice for promotion in the social hierarchy. At the same time, critical analyses offer the very passive vision of the law student as merely ‘being processed’ through the educational grinder. Paradoxically, in doing so they confirm the vision they criticize. This article argues that, by adopting a pragmatic philosophical perspective, it is possible to go beyond this one-sided picture. Over the past few decades, there has been an increase in ‘practical’ attitudes in legal education. Socrates’ model of didactics, clinical education and moot courts are giving rise to institutionalized ideas as structural elements of legal education, owing to which a purely disciplinary pedagogy may be superseded. All these practices allow students to accept and confront the viewpoints of others. Education completed in harmony with these ideas promotes an active, critical member of community, who is ready to advance justified moral judgements, and as such is compliant with pragmatic ethics of democracy.

Legal ethics may be taught indirectly, given resistance to ethics as a separate and presumably merely subjective subject. This may be done by stressing the importance of facts (as the vast majority of legal issues relate to contested facts), of professional role consciousness and of the importance of formal and informal respect for all concerned. This indirect approach is best integrated into the whole of the legal curriculum, in moot practices and legal clinics offering perceptions of the administration of legal justice from receiving ends as well. Basic knowledge of forensic sciences, argumentation and rhetoric may do good here as well. Teachers of law are to set an example in their professional (and general) conduct.

This essay discusses green criminology in relation to the development of non-anthropocentric research perspectives in history and cultural anthropology. Green criminological concepts of ‘environmental harm’ and ‘ecocide’ turn doing harm to nature and ecosystems, even when legal, into object of criminological research. Historical research exploring a wider time frame deepens and enriches criminological understanding of, e.g., wildlife trafficking and climate change. According active agency to animals and other non-human actors and attempts to create a new language transcending human-nature dichotomies, as undertaken in transspecies or multispecies history, anthropology, and narratology, offer substantial contributions to green criminologies of everyday life.

Climate litigation is an understudied phenomenon in criminology. In this article we will discuss the rise of climate change litigation and growing recognition of global environmental harms from a green criminological perspective. More specifically, we will discuss both the legal reasoning and the impact of the Urgenda case in the Netherlands in the context of environmental, ecological and climate justice. We will conclude with how this case contributes for the recognition of diverse climate victims and strengthening of climate justice in the near future.

‘Antropocene’ is a wellknown concept among those that are concerned about the Earth’s future. Nevertheless, there is a heated scientific debat about the start of this era in history and the name ‘antropocene’in itself. In this contribution it is stated that that debate is helpful in raising important questions about the desatrous influence of mankind on live on this planet. Criminologists should take a stance and address these questions as well. This contribution includes a manifest that contains points for further action for criminologists.

This article analyzes the opinion of twenty-four Surinamese ex-convicted young men on restorative justice. The results were obtained through four focus group sessions and a concise survey form. The factors (a) type of offense, (b) seriousness of offense and (c) prevention of recurrence were discussed. The opinions are divided, but the majority is of the opinion that restorative justice can mainly work for serious and violent crimes. Fear of revenge appears to be a barrier to participation. Employment has been indicated as the key to real recovery of the offender and prevention of recidivism (and thus satisfaction for the victim). The results provide insight into the susceptibility to restorative justice among this specific group in Suriname.

Thought experiments have been widely used in virtually all sciences and humanities. Law is no exception. We can find countless instances of such experiments in both the legal practice and the legal theory. However, this method has hardly been studied by legal scholars, which contrasts with the vast literature devoted to it in other fields of knowledge. This article analyses the role that some thought experiments – those where an imaginary legal change is made, and its social effects are observed – may play in law. In particular, we show why these empirical legal thought experiments might be useful for the practice and theory of law, the main principles for conducting them and how the law deals with them.

André Hoekema, sociologist and lawyer, was one of the driving forces within the sociology and anthropology of law for half a century. His scientific career has been targeted on the development of a non-technic concept of practice for social science, specifically a sociological practice of creating social cohesion and legitimacy and an anthropological practice of cultural self-definition.

In our research project ‘Living on the Other Side’, we aim to understand how (ir)regular migrants from the Middle East and West/Central Africa deal with the legal and formal aspect of their lives in Morocco by focusing on major life events, such as marriage, divorce, birth and death. Life does not simply stand still when residing in a foreign country – people continue to marry, divorce, have children and die. However, there is little empirical knowledge on what migrants actually do when faced with such events. Registering major life events secures a migrant’s legal identity and protects their human rights. Having a legal identity, most likely, influences the daily lives of migrants. A migrant, who does not formally exist in the eyes of the state, might not be able to access basic services, like health care and education. From a legal pluralist perspective, we aim to investigate how migration and family law intersect by conducting online and offline ethnographic fieldwork.

Criminological research has emphasized the importance of procedural justice of authorities during encounters with citizens. Theory and prior research propose that the procedurally just treatment by the police influences, possibly via legitimacy, citizens’ willingness to cooperate with authorities in the criminal justice chain. This article tests the hypotheses of procedural justice theory using Dutch data of the European Social Survey (N=1,616). The results show an association between the procedurally just treatment of citizens by the police and cooperation with criminal justice authorities. However, this association has not been explained by the legitimacy of the police.

The article deals with the possibility of socializing law students through space. It first indicates which features of space affect the possibility of influencing interactions and identity. It then discusses how we can use symbolic interactionism to study interactions and socialization in spaces of law faculties. Then, on the basis of the interviews conducted with law faculty students about their space perception, it shows how to research student socialization through space and how far-reaching its effects can be.