This article outlines the need in the Netherlands for socially effective justice that better resolves citizens’ problems. The author argues that new forms of dispute resolution should be integrated in the justice system. The author first describes various types of innovations. Then he outlines the obstacles to innovations. A major obstacle is that many stakeholders in the existing legal system are simultaneously the gatekeepers for the admission of innovations. It is necessary to create an infrastructure that welcomes, reinforces, tests, finances and imports new treatments for legal problems. |
Artikel |
De best mogelijke rechtspraak |
Tijdschrift | Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2019 |
Trefwoorden | Legal system, Effectiveness, Legal innovations, Dispute resolution, New technologies |
Auteurs | Prof.dr. Maurits Barendrecht |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Artikel |
De vrederechter in historisch perspectief |
Tijdschrift | Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2019 |
Trefwoorden | legal history, justice of the peace, Conciliation, small claim courts, access to justice |
Auteurs | Mr. dr. Emese von Bóné |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
This article is about the history of the justice of the peace, a low profile judge where people easily have access to. The history of the justice of the peace goes back to the seventeenth century. The justice of the peace was reintroduced in the Netherlands in the French period, when the country was annexed by the French Empire under the reign of Napoleon. The justice of the peace was also introduced in Belgium and is still in use. The most important task of the justice of the peace is ‘conciliation’. In the conciliation procedure the justice of the peace has a very active role. The judge tries to mediate between the parties in order to come to an agreement. |
Artikel |
Experimenten in de civiele rechtspraak: een oplossing voor welk probleem? |
Tijdschrift | Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2019 |
Trefwoorden | court pilots, civil procedure, efficiency, policy analysis, legal protection |
Auteurs | Mr. dr. Kim van der Kraats |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
In Dutch courts several pilots are being carried out in order to enhance the quality of civil procedure. The main focus of the pilots is to speed up the procedure and make it more cost-effective, while ensuring the procedure is easily accessible and is overseen by a mediating judge in a nearby court. This focus largely corresponds with aspects of the civil procedure that the courts and the minister of Justice have identified as in need of attention. The courts and the minister have focused on different specific problems and propose different solutions, however, and neither aims to address the quality of civil procedure as a whole. It is doubtful whether the proposals for improvement, put forward by the courts and the minister, can address the concerns they have intended to resolve and whether the overall quality of the civil procedure (for all civil cases instead of the simple ones) will be improved. Solutions to the problems of the civil procedure cannot be devised without first developing a clear picture of the problems people experience with civil procedures and the courts. |
Artikel |
De pilot van de Rotterdamse Regelrechter |
Tijdschrift | Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2019 |
Auteurs | Mr. Wim Wetzels |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Socially effective justice requires innovative legislation that allows the judge to experiment with simple procedures that bring parties together in order to prevent escalation of disputes. For that reason, the Dutch government has enabled experiments with low-threshold local civil courts. This article focuses on the experiences with such a court in Rotterdam. The court provides a simple, fast and cheap procedure with the aim of reaching a solution to the dispute in joint consultation. The article provides insight into the nature and the number of disputes that have been dealt with up to now. |
Artikel |
Vrijwillige rechtspraak: rechters op het mediationpad? |
Tijdschrift | Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2019 |
Trefwoorden | neighbourhood courts, mediation, friendly solutions, voluntary jurisdiction, de-escalation |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Dick Allewijn |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
A characteristic difference between administration of justice and mediation so far was the element of voluntariness on the side of the clients. Administration of justice however is, for the citizen who is brought before the courts, not voluntary. Recently pilots have been started in which citizens can turn voluntarily to the Court at low cost, and not far from their neighborhood. Judges will not primarily aim at making a decision in accordance with the law, but at finding friendly solutions. Does this mean that judges are going to mediate? And if so, how should this be appreciated? In this contribution attention is paid to certain aspects of this question. It is argued that differences between jurisdiction and mediation still remain. More than mediators judges must act within the legal framework. The extent to which they can engage in the emotional undercurrent of conflicts is limited. Confidence in the Court is from a different origin than trust in the mediator, and that also makes a difference. And finally, a judge is competent to make a binding judgment, which influences the way he or she is looked at by the parties. |