Zoekresultaat: 13 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid x Rubriek Article x
Artikel

Access_open Het effect van een pro Justitia-rapportage op de bewijsbeslissing: een empirische verkenning

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Pro Justitia, Guilt, Conviction, Forensic mental health report
Auteurs Roosmarijn van Es MSc., Dr. Janne van Doorn, Prof. dr. Jan de Keijser e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A forensic mental health report is requested in about 30% of more serious cases presented to the criminal court. These reports can be used at sentencing and advise the judge on criminal responsibility, recidivism risk, and possible treatment measures, but is not a formal factor in decisions about guilt. The current study focuses on the (unwarranted) effect of forensic mental health information on conviction decisions. Using an experimental vignette study among 155 criminology students, results show that when a mental disorder is present, conviction rates are higher than when such information is absent. In line with the story model of judicial decision-making, additional analyses showed that this effect was mediated by the evaluation of guilt rather than by the evaluation of other physical evidence. Implications for further research and practice are discussed.


Roosmarijn van Es MSc.
Roosmarijn van Es is promovenda bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden. Haar onderzoek richt zich op de rol van informatie in pro Justitia-rapportages in rechterlijke beslissingen over bewijs en straf.

Dr. Janne van Doorn
Janne van Doorn is universitair docent bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. Jan de Keijser
Jan de Keijser is hoogleraar Criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. mr. Maarten Kunst
Maarten Kunst is hoogleraar Criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

Access_open De gelegenheid te baat nemen?

Criminaliteit in tijden van corona en sociale onthouding

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Corona, Crime, Lockdown, Opportunity theory, COVID-19
Auteurs Dr. Edwin Kruisbergen, Marco Haas MA, Drs. Joanieke Snijders e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    To control the COVID-19 outbreak Dutch government opted for a so-called intelligent lockdown. The virus as well as the lockdown caused significant personal and societal damage. It also created, however, a unique natural experiment. How did the forced stay in affect the crime levels? This article presents empirical data on crime trends during the lockdown. Initially, the general crime level decreased sharply. However, the general crime level quickly returned to pre-lockdown levels. Different types of crime displayed divergent trends, e.g. property crimes decreased sharply whereas online crime rates increased considerably. These trends fit rather well with an opportunity theoretical approach regarding crime.


Dr. Edwin Kruisbergen
Edwin Kruisbergen is onderzoeker Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum (WODC) en Kenniscoördinator DG Politie en Veiligheidsregio’s, Ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid. Als onderzoeker vooral actief op de terreinen georganiseerde criminaliteit en opsporing.

Marco Haas MA
Marco Haas is teamleider van het Informatie-analyseteam (IAT) van DG Politie en Veiligheidsregio’s (Ministerie van JenV) en de politie. Het IAT is een gecombineerd team van politie, JenV en het CBS dat op basis van data-analyse politiethema’s onderzoekt ten behoeve van beleids- en besluitvorming.

Drs. Joanieke Snijders
Joanieke Snijders is informatieanalist bij het Informatie-analyseteam (IAT) van DG Politie en Veiligheidsregio’s (Ministerie van JenV) en de politie. Projectcoördinator van de ontwikkeling van een datagedreven monitor die maatschappelijke ontwikkelingen volgt en de mogelijke invloed daarvan in kaart brengt.

Ron Maas MMO
Ron Maas is teamleider Informatie-analyseteam (IAT) en Hoofd Nationale Briefing, Politie.
Artikel

Access_open Geen VOG, geen werk? Een studie naar VOG-aanvragen en werkkansen na vrijlating

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Certificate of conduct, Employment, Prisoners, re-entry, prisoner re-entry
Auteurs Dr. Anke Ramakers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    It is unclear to what extent criminal record screening policies can explain low employment rates after release. This descriptive study provides more insight into this matter by examining whether ex-prisoners applied for a certificate of conduct, found employment and whether this job was found without such a certificate. To answer these questions interview data on ex-prisoners (N=931) are combined with data on criminal record screenings. Only 6 percent applied for a certificate, half of which were granted. Many ex-prisoners did not report any employment, but almost all working ex-prisoners found this job without a certificate. These findings bring nuance to discussions on the role of criminal record screening after release.


Dr. Anke Ramakers
Anke Ramakers is universitair docent criminologie aan de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden. Haar onderzoek is gericht op de arbeidsperspectieven van daders en de gevolgen van gevangenisstraffen en sociaal beleid voor re-integratie.
Artikel

Upperdogs Versus Underdogs

Judicial Review of Administrative Drug-Related Closures in the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Eviction, War on drugs, Party capability, Empirical legal research, Drug policy
Auteurs Mr. Michelle Bruijn en Dr. Michel Vols
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, mayors are entitled to close public and non-public premises if drug-related activities are being conducted there. Using data from the case law of Dutch lower courts, published between 2008 and 2016, this article examines the relative success of different types of litigants, and the influence of case characteristics on drug-related closure cases. We build on Galanter’s framework of ‘repeat players’ and ‘one-shotters’, to argue that a mayor is the stronger party and is therefore more likely to win in court. We categorise mayors as ‘upperdogs’, and the opposing litigants as ‘underdogs’. Moreover, we distinguish stronger mayors from weaker ones, based on the population size of their municipality. Similarly, we distinguish the stronger underdogs from the weaker ones. Businesses and organisations are classified as stronger parties, relative to individuals, who are classified as weaker parties. In line with our hypothesis, we find that mayors win in the vast majority of cases. However, contrary to our presumptions, we find that mayors have a significantly lower chance of winning a case if they litigate against weak underdogs. When controlling for particular case characteristics, such as the type of drugs and invoked defences, our findings offer evidence that case characteristics are consequential for the resolution of drug-related closure cases in the Netherlands.


Mr. Michelle Bruijn
Michelle Bruijn is promovendus en docent aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Haar onderzoek richt zich op de regulering van cannabis en de sluiting van drugspanden.

Dr. Michel Vols
Michel Vols is hoogleraar Openbare-Orderecht aan Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op Openbare orde en veiligheid, en het gebruik van data science (machine learning) bij het bestuderen van juridische data.
Artikel

The precaution controversy: an analysis through the lens of Ulrich Beck and Michel Foucault

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Precautionary principle, risk society, governmentality, risk governance, environmental law
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    According to the precautionary principle lack of scientific evidence for the existence of a certain (environmental) risk should not be a reason not to take preventative policy measures. The precautionary principle had a stormy career in International environmental law and made its mark on many treaties, including the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). However it remains controversial. Proponents see it as the necessary legal curb to keep the dangerous tendencies of industrial production and technology in check. Opponents regard it with suspicion. They fear it will lead to a decrease in freedom and fear the powers to intervene that it grants the state. In this article the principle is reviewed from the perspectives of Ulrich Beck’s ‘reflexive modernisation’ and Michel Foucault’s notion of governmentality. It is argued that from Beck’s perspective the precautionary principle is the result of a learning process in which mankind gradually comes to adopt a reflexive attitude to the risks modernity has given rise to. It represents the wish to devise more inclusive and democratic policies on risks and environmental hazards. From the perspective of Michel Foucault however, the principle is part and parcel of neo-liberal tendencies of responsibilisation. Risk management and prudency are devolved to the public in an attempt to minimise risk taking, while at the same time optimising production. Moreover, it grants legitimacy to state intervention if the public does not live up to the responsibilities foisted on it. Both perspectives are at odds, but represent different sides of the same coin and might learn from each other concerns.


Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is a socio-legal scholar affiliated with the University of Amsterdam Law School and the PPLE honours college. Next to lecturing on a variety of subjects, he focusses on interdisciplinary legal research into the possibilities of law to deal with contemporary social problems.
Artikel

Autonomy of law in Indonesia

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Rule of law, Indonesia, Socio-legal studies, Legal scholarhip, Judiciary
Auteurs Professor Adriaan Bedner
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article seeks to answer how useful the theoretical approaches developed in Europe and the United States are for explaining or understanding the autonomy of law in Indonesia – a nation that is on the verge of becoming a lower-middle-income country and whose legal system presents many of the features found in other developing countries’ legal systems. The article first sketches three lines of theoretical thought that have dominated the inquiry into autonomy of law in (Western) sociology and then assesses to what extent they are represented in the socio-legal studies of Indonesian law. The conclusion is that although socio-legal scholars studying developing countries need supplementary concepts and theories, they can use the Western ones as their point of departure in understanding the functioning of law in a setting that is very different from the one in which these theories were developed.


Professor Adriaan Bedner
Adriaan Bedner is professor of law and society in Indonesia at the Van Vollenhoven Institute (Leiden Law School). He has worked on many different subjects within this field, including family law, administrative courts, and environmental law. His present focus is on the Indonesian Ombudsman and on legal education.
Artikel

Becker’s theory on crime and punishment, a useful guide for law enforcement policy in The Netherlands?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2016
Trefwoorden Economics of crime, law enforcement policy, Gary Becker
Auteurs Ben van Velthoven en Peter van Wijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Becker’s theory on crime and punishment provides guidelines for designing an optimal law enforcement policy. In designing such a policy the costs of law enforcement should be traded-off against the benefits that originate in deterring criminal acts. We investigate whether law enforcement policy in the Netherlands is consistent with this guidelines. Since policy makers are not very precise on the goals of law enforcement policy and hardly anything is known about the effectiveness and efficiency of instruments, it turns out to be impossible to say whether law enforcement policy actually contributes to social welfare. This is not necessarily problematic if, in line with the efficient law hypothesis, law enforcement automatically converges to an efficient outcome. Furthermore, Becker’s theory appears to miss a crucial element by not taking account of existing preferences for retribution. If utility is derived from seeing that justice is done, this should be included in the welfare criterion. Assuming policy makers prefer welfare enhancing law enforcement, they would be well-advised to start systematically collecting information on the effectiveness and efficiency of instruments of law enforcement policy.


Ben van Velthoven
Ben van Velthoven is universitair hoofddocent Rechtseconomie aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden.

Peter van Wijck
Peter van Wijck is universitair hoofddocent Rechtseconomie aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

Understanding judges’ choices of sentence types as interpretative work: An explorative study in a Dutch police court

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2016
Trefwoorden Judicial decision-making, sentencing type, (ir)redeemability, whole case approach
Auteurs Peter Mascini, Irene van Oorschot PhD, Assistant professor Don Weenink e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article critically evaluates the prevailing factor-oriented (e.g. a priori defined legal and extralegal characteristics of defendants) approach in analyses of judicial decision-making. Rather than assuming such factors, we aim to demonstrate how Dutch judges engage in interpretative work to arrive at various sentence types. In their interpretative work, judges attempt to weigh and compare various legal and extralegal features of defendants. Importantly, they do so in the context of the case as a whole, which means that these features do not have independent or fixed meanings. Judges select and weigh information to create an image of defendants’ redeemability. However, extralegal concerns other than redeemability also inform judges’ decisions. We argue that studying the naturally occurring interpretative work of judges results in a better understanding of judicial decision-making than outcome-oriented studies, which view criminal cases as collections of independent legal and extralegal factors.


Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini holds a chair in Empirical Legal Studies at the Erasmus School of Law of the Erasmus University Rotterdam, where he is also associate professor of sociology at the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences. His research focuses on the legitimization, implementation, and enforcement of laws and policies.

Irene van Oorschot PhD
Irene van Oorschot is a PhD candidate at the Faculty of the Social Sciences at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and will soon start as a postdoctoral researcher at the Anthropology Department of the University of Amsterdam. Drawing on actor network theory and feminist studies of knowledge, her research focuses on legal and scientific modes of truth-production.

Assistant professor Don Weenink
Don Weenink is assistant professor of Sociology at the Department of Sociology at the University of Amsterdam. He has published work on, among other subjects, ethnic inequalities in judicial sentencing.

Gratiëlla Schippers
Gratiëlla Schippers has studied Sociology at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. For her master thesis she has done research about the understanding of judges’ choices of sentence types.
Artikel

Responsibilities of the state and legal professions

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden responsibilities, the state, lawyers, the judiciary and judges
Auteurs Mies Westerveld en Ashley Terlouw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution, which is based on the Dutch legal system, deals with the responsibilities of the State and legal professions in ensuring access to justice. The responsibilities of the four main players involved in bringing justice to the citizen are discussed: the legislator, the executive, the judiciary, and the legal profession. Responsibilities for access to justice do not only stem from the law, they do also evolve from societal problems and discussions. The contribution deals with both. Several actors share some of the responsibilities. One can think of responsibilities for information, for financing, and for being aware of vulnerabilities and other obstacles. What are the legal responsibilities and what other responsibilities are felt by the actors involved and how do they deal with them? And as a result: do they contribute to access to justice, do they form an obstacle, or both?


Mies Westerveld
Mies Westerveld is Professor Legal aid by special appointment and Professor in Labour Law (social insurance) at the University of Amsterdam. Her research concentrates on current issues of access to justice and state-financed legal aid on the one hand and the decreasing role of social insurance on a fragmented labour market on the other hand.

Ashley Terlouw
Ashley Terlouw is Professor in Sociology of Law at the Radboud University of Nijmegen. She is responsible for the Centre for Migration Law of the Radboud University. Besides she is part-time Judge at the District Court of Gelderland. Her research concentrates on legal and societal issues of asylum and equal treatment and on the working of the judiciary.
Artikel

Tenant vs. owner: deriving access to justice from the right to housing

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden tenants’ rights, adequate housing, discrimination, effectiveness of law
Auteurs Nico Moons
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The right to adequate housing has since long been established in international and European human rights law and has been (constitutionally) incorporated into many domestic legal systems. This contribution focuses on the extent to which this fundamental right influences rental law and the horizontal relationship between tenant and landlord and how it contributes to the tenant’s access to justice. The right to housing certainly accounts for tenant’s rights, but since international and European human rights law evidently centres around state obligations, any possible impact on the position of tenants remains indirect. This is of course different on the national plane. In Belgium, the constitutional right to housing has been implemented through regional Housing Codes, complementing private law measures and creating additional protection to tenants. Nonetheless, many challenges still remain in increasing access to justice for tenants, both top-down and bottom-up: lack of knowledge and complexity of law, imbalance in power and dependency, discrimination, etc.


Nico Moons
Nico Moons is a PhD student at the Faculty of Law of the University of Antwerp (research group Government & Law). His research topic involves the effectiveness of the right to adequate housing. Previously, he has worked at the Council for Alien Law Litigation.
Artikel

Wetgeving, empirisch-juridisch onderzoek en Legal Big Data

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2015
Trefwoorden legislation, big data, empirical legal research, nudging
Auteurs Frans L. Leeuw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A second empirical revolution in law is in full swing: legal big data have made their entrance and will play an increasingly important role in the legal field. Legal big data, for example, increase the accessibility and transparency of files. They make it easier for legislators to find out how society views proposed legislation. Using big data, all jurisprudence can be processed very easily and judicial decisions can be predicted with a high degree of certainty. The contribution concludes with a number of legal and ethical issues and methodological challenges in relation to legal big data, such as ownership, privacy and representativeness.


Frans L. Leeuw
Frans L. Leeuw is directeur van het Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum (WODC) bij het ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie. Tevens is hij hoogleraar Recht, openbaar bestuur en sociaalwetenschappelijk onderzoek aan de universiteit van Maastricht. Eerder was hij onder meer directeur Doelmatigheidsonderzoek bij de Algemene Rekenkamer. Hij publiceerde vele artikelen en boeken, vooral op het terrein van evaluatie.
Artikel

National variations in the implementation and enforcement of European food hygiene regulations

Comparing the structure of food controls and regulations between Scotland and the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden food regulation, official controls, EU food law, implementation, enforcement
Auteurs Tetty Havinga
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the course of time the European Union has increased its powers considerably. Currently, almost all food safety regulations in the member states rest on European law. Despite this common legal base, several differences between member states still exist. This article compares the way Scottish and Dutch authorities deal with a particular item of European food law: the development of national guides to good practice for hygiene and for the application of HACCP principles by the food industry. The results of this investigation are consistent with the conclusion of Falkner et al. that the implementation of EU law in both the Netherlands and the UK depends on domestic issues. The dominant issue in Scotland (and the UK) is the FSA objective to bring consistent food controls and independency from industry which results in the development of governmental guidance. The prevailing issue in the Netherlands is making industry responsible for food safety which helps explain the extensive use of industry guides. This study shows that in order to understand what happens on the ground it is important to look beyond transposition or direct effect and also to investigate the implementation of regulations and to dig deeper than just their transposition.


Tetty Havinga
Tetty Havinga is Associate Professor at the Institute for the Sociology of Law, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands. She has published on the regulation of food safety, policy implementation and law enforcement, equal opportunities law, asylum migration and migrant workers. Her recent research projects deal with the development and effects of private regulation of food safety, oversight and official controls in the food industry, and the experiences of large companies with Dutch special courts. She is co-editor of The Changing Landscape of Food Governance (to be published by Edward Elgar, 2015).
Artikel

Loyaliteit binnen de rechterlijke macht

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden judiciary, loyalty, judges, new public management, socialisation
Auteurs Nina Holvast en Nienke Doornbos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Judges in the Netherlands have recently expressed their concerns in the media over the organization of the judiciary and the pressure to deliver output. At the same time, they consider themselves highly loyal to their work. In this article we explore this seeming contradiction by studying the developments in the selection, training and organisation of the judiciary and considering the consequences that these developments could have on the loyalty of judges. In doing so, a distinction is made between loyalty to the profession, to the organisation and to colleagues. We follow Hirschman's theory on Exit, Voice and Loyalty and determine that the act of judges expressing their concerns (instead of exiting the judiciary) is essentially a sign of their loyalty. However, we reason that this displays more loyalty to the profession than to the organisation. Due to changes in the selection and training of judges, more candidates who were formerly employed in other settings, e.g. in advocacy, will enter the profession. With their socialisation taking place in a more business-like setting, where values such as efficiency and productivity are significant, it is expected that they will be more willing to accept the new public management values which are criticized by the present generation of judges.


Nina Holvast
Nina Holvast is promovenda bij het Paul Scholten Centrum van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zij schrijft een rechtssociologisch proefschrift naar de rol van juridische ondersteuning in het rechterlijk besluitvormingsproces. Over dit onderwerp verschijnt binnenkort: ‘Considering the consequences of increased reliance on judicial assistants: a study on Dutch courts’ in International Journal of the Legal Profession.

Nienke Doornbos
Nienke Doornbos is universitair docent en onderzoeker bij de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zij doceert de minor Rechtswetenschappelijk onderzoek en het vak Recht en menselijk gedrag. Haar onderzoek richt zich onder meer op organisatorische kanten van rechterlijke besluitvorming en op toezicht en tuchtrecht binnen de advocatuur.
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.