Zoekresultaat: 8 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht x Rubriek Article x
Artikel

De strafrechtelijke problematiek van het ronselen voor de gewapende strijd

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Ronselen, Terrorisme, Werven, “205 Sr”, Gewapende strijd
Auteurs Mr. Eric Druijf en mr. dr. Marloes van Noorloos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article deals with the criminal offence of recruiting persons for armed struggle (art. 205 of the Dutch Criminal Code), a provision that nowadays mainly arises in terrorism cases. It revolves around the dilemmas and interpretative questions that this criminal offence has yielded so far – especially since the amendments in 2004 – and examines how the courts have dealt with it.


Mr. Eric Druijf
Mr. E.H.M. Druijf is senior-rechter in de Rechtbank Midden-Nederland en redactielid van dit tijdschrift.

mr. dr. Marloes van Noorloos
Mr. dr. L.A. van Noorloos is universitair hoofddocent strafrecht aan Tilburg Law School en redactielid van dit tijdschrift.
Artikel

Access_open Crimmigratie en bestuursrechtelijke criminologie: verwante concepten of verschillende disciplines?

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Crimmigratie, Bestuursstrafrecht, Bestuursrechtelijke criminologie, Intrekking van het Nederlanderschap
Auteurs Mr. dr. drs. Benny van der Vorm
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    At first sight there seems to be a strong relationship between crimmigration and the criminology of administrative law enforcement. However, a further analysis shows that crimmigration fits more in the concept of the so-called integrated science of criminal justice. Crimmigration can be identified as an interdisciplinary concept, while the criminology of the administrative law enforcement should be classified as an empirical discipline. Nevertheless, both concepts complement each other with regard to the socio-scientific study of the practice of immigration law.


Mr. dr. drs. Benny van der Vorm
Mr. dr. drs. B. van der Vorm is universitair docent Straf(proces)recht aan de Universiteit Utrecht (Willem Pompe Instituut voor strafrechtswetenschappen en Montaigne Centrum voor Rechtsstaat en Rechtspleging).
Artikel

EU Smart borders, from strategic consideration to operational execution: an effective counter-terrorism strategy or discriminatory system control?

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden EU Smart borders, Schengen Area, Biometric matching system, Terrorism
Auteurs Dr. Daniela Rodríguez Bautista
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The inclusion of biometric data in EU border controls reflects a shift from immigration management as an original purpose by making control and identification of individuals a top priority. It also shows a preference for biometrical data as part of the European security strategy. This article elaborates on these so-called ‘EU Smart borders’ and focusses on the different existing central information systems including these data.


Dr. Daniela Rodríguez Bautista
Dr. D. Rodríguez Bautista works as a legal officer (administrateur) at the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Artikel

Access_open Migrant smuggling in the Mediterranean

An excludable act under article 1F(b) Refugee Convention?

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden article 1F, Refugee Convention, exclusion clauses, migrant smuggling, serious non-political crimes
Auteurs Anne Aagten LLL.M.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In 2015, deadly incidents of migrant smuggling in the Mediterranean were daily covered by everyday newspapers. Empirical research has shown that migrants themselves may be involved in these smuggling operations. If they apply for refugee protection, they may be excluded from refugee status under Article 1F of the Refugee Convention. Article 1F(b) excludes asylum seekers from international protection if serious reasons exist to consider that they have committed serious non-political crimes. This contribution discusses whether migrant smuggling can be considered as such and whether various forms of participation in smuggling operations give rise to individual responsibility and trigger application of article 1F(b).


Anne Aagten LLL.M.
A.E.M. Aagten LLL.M. is onderwijs- en onderzoeksmedewerker bij het Instituut voor Immigratierecht (Universiteit Leiden).
Artikel

Preventieve politiecontroles en interne grenscontroles in het Schengengebied

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Grenscontrole, Profileren, Schengen
Auteurs Prof. dr. mr. Peter Rodrigues en Prof. mr. dr. Maartje van der Woude
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Ever since the 2015 start of what is now often referred to as the European ‘migration crisis’, European member states have been struggling with one of the key fundaments of the European Union and in particular the Schengen Agreement: the principle of free movement. Whereas this principle entails that people should be able to move freely within the Schengen Area, as a result of the ongoing securitization and politicization of migration, Member States are exploring the different opportunities the Schengen Border Code allows them to monitor intra-Schengen cross-border mobility. In doing so, countries seem to have two options: either to temporarily reintroduce border controls or to – permanently – carry out police or immigration controls in an area around the border. In this article we explore and critically assess the choices various countries have made and what seems to be the position of the European Commission in all this.


Prof. dr. mr. Peter Rodrigues
Prof. dr. mr. P.R. Rodrigues is Hoogleraar Immigratierecht en voorzitter van het Instituut voor Immigratierecht. Hij is verbonden aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden en lid van de redactie van Crimmigratie & Recht.

Prof. mr. dr. Maartje van der Woude
Prof. mr. dr. M.A.H. van der Woude is Hoogleraar Rechtssociologie bij het Van Vollenhoven Instituut voor Recht, Bestuur & Samenleving. Zij is verbonden aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden en lid van de redactie van Crimmigratie & Recht.
Artikel

Access_open Discriminatie van IS en Al-Nusra-strijders bij intrekking Nederlanderschap in Unierechtelijk perspectief

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Rijkswet op het Nederlanderschap, intrekking naturalisatie, terrorisme, openbare orde
Auteurs Mr. Florimond Wassenaar
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In its efforts in making effective counter terrorism legislation the Dutch government has introduced the possibility to deprive its own nationals of their Dutch nationality. The competence to revoke Dutch citizenship may arise in case of conducting behaviour abroad that can be labelled as terrorism or facilitating terrorism. Dutch citizenship can only be rescinded by the immigration authorities when such acts are performed outside the Dutch borders in certain appointed areas for certain appointed organisations. This is currently the case for the area of Syria and the organisations IS and Al-Nusra. However given the obligations within the Convention on the reduction of statelessness only Dutch nationals with dual citizenship fall within the scope of this newly introduced legislation. This article focusses on the question whether in EU-law perspective the distinction made between Dutch with dual citizenship and Dutch without a second foreign nationality is against the principle of equal treatment. By discussing the Council Directive 2000/43/EC, case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the preparatory documents of the convention on the reduction of statelessness the argument is developed that the convention serves as a trump card to enhance and justify the newly introduced legislation. Given CJEU case law the question of loyalty towards the member state of origin may lead to deprivation of EU-nationality. The aforementioned distinction made in Dutch nationality law would only be justified if it can be successfully be proven that dual citizenship raises an ipso facto loyalty issue toward member states by dual nationality holders. Since evidence of that nature is non existent it is concluded that the newly introduced counter terrorism provisions on deprivation of Dutch citizenship are discriminatory and advances second class nationality in The Netherlands.


Mr. Florimond Wassenaar
Mr. C.F. Wassenaar is advocaat bij Inigo advocaten te Rotterdam.

    Both in Dutch migration law and criminal law, entry bans, provided for in the Return Directive, play a significant role. The length of an entry ban may exceed five years if the third-country national represents a serious threat to public policy, public security or national security. This article focusses on the definition of ‘serious threat to public policy’ and elaborates on the relevant moment in time in judicial proceedings before the administrative and criminal courts.


Mr. Nanda Ros
Mr. N.J. Ros is stafjurist bij het gerechtshof Amsterdam en is als adviseur voor de Raad voor de rechtspraak betrokken bij het moderniseringstraject van het Wetboek van Strafvordering.

Mr. Jim Waasdorp
Mr. J.R.K.A.M. Waasdorp is ambtenaar van staat bij de Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State (thans gedetacheerd bij het directoraat-generaal Bibliotheek, onderzoek en documentatie van het Hof van Justitie van de Europese Unie) en is als onderzoeker verbonden aan de Universiteit Utrecht. Hij is tevens lid van de redactie van Crimmigratie & Recht.
Artikel

Access_open Criminal law sanctions and the Return Directive: the position of illegally staying third-country nationals in the European Union

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden Crimmigration, Return Directive, Entry ban, Sanctions, Criminal law
Auteurs Aniel Pahladsingh LL.M. en Jim Waasdorp LL.M.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    At EU level, the use of substantive criminal law as a response to illegal migration is materialised by both the EU legislator and the Member States individually. EU involvement in criminalizing illegal migration takes place in a twofold manner: directly, through harmonization of national legislations, and indirectly, through the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). An example of the latter is the case law of the CJEU regarding criminal law sanctions for breaching an entry ban. In this article, we will analyse judgments of the CJEU in the light of crimmigration law and make a distinction between the Member States’ power to classify a breach of an entry ban as an offence and to lay down criminal law sanctions in national legislation, and their power to impose such sanctions.


Aniel Pahladsingh LL.M.
Mr. A. Pahladsingh is jurist bij de Raad van State en rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Rotterdam. Hij is tevens lid van de redactie van Crimmigratie & Recht.

Jim Waasdorp LL.M.
Mr. J.R.K.A.M. Waasdorp LL.M. works as a lawyer at the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Dutch Council of State (as of the 1st of June 2017, Jim is seconded to the Directorate General of Library, Research and Documentation of the Court of Justice of the European Union) and is a researcher at the University of Utrecht.
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.