Zoekresultaat: 2 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift PROCES x Rubriek Article x
Artikel

Zelfredzaamheid in detentie

Kritische kanttekeningen bij het systeem van promoveren en degraderen

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden Zelfredzaamheid, Burgerschap, Gevangenis, Autonomie
Auteurs Dr. Esther van Ginneken
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the ‘participation society’ it is expected that citizens actively contribute to solving societal problems, including health care, immigration and security issues. A somewhat similar responsibilisation culture is visible in prisons, where prisoners are held responsible for their own rehabilitation. This article problematizes the way in which prisoners’ agency is promoted in Dutch prisons, considering prisoners’ constrained agency and the normative expectations that are tied to the approach. This critique is advanced through discussion of the promotion/demotion system that has been used in Dutch prisons since 2014. This system, comparable to the Incentives and Earned Privileges system in England and Wales, espouses both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ behavioural norms. The soft behavioural norms reflect a citizenship ideal that extends beyond compliance with the law. It is argued that these normative expectations tied to agency have a limiting effect on prisoners’ autonomy. This article argues in favour of a shift from the citizenship ideal to an autonomy ideal, which applies the principle of minimum restrictions. Furthermore, access to education, reintegration courses and contact with family should be treated as a right, rather than a privilege, in order to maximise autonomy and minimise the harmful effects of imprisonment.


Dr. Esther van Ginneken
Dr. Esther van Ginneken is universitair docent Criminologie aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

De OM-strafbeschikking en de minderjarige bestrafte

Is het recht op een eerlijk proces voldoende verzekerd?

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 6 2015
Trefwoorden OM-strafbeschikking / Public prosecutor’s penalty decision, jeugdige verdachten / juvenile suspects, recht op eerlijk process / right to due process
Auteurs Petra Van Es MBA
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article tries to answer the question whether the right to due process, especially for minors receiving a public prosecutor’s penalty decision in the Netherlands is sufficiently guaranteed. To answer this question, formal legislature with respect to this topic, the concept of ‘due process’ as well as the actual legal guarantees for minors, have been explored. In juvenile criminal law, contrary to adult criminal law, the pedagogic aspect plays an important role. The pedagogic point of view is also taken into account. A recent report by the Attorney General of the Dutch Supreme Court showed undoubtedly that after six years of experience, the processes surrounding the instrument of the public prosecutor’s penalty decision are far from being executed flawlessly. Both from a judicial perspective as well as a pedagogic perspective, this is a serious problem. The most important procedural aspects that require substantial improvement are related to determining guilt, attorney accessibility and the presence of parents.


Petra Van Es MBA
Petra van Es MBA werkt als officier Veiligheidsregio Amsterdam-Amstelland voor het ministerie van Defensie en studeert strafrecht aan de Universiteit Leiden.
Interface Showing Amount
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.