Zoekresultaat: 15 artikelen

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

Verschillen tussen burgers in vertrouwen in de rechtspraak

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Confidence in the judiciary, framing, windtunneling
Auteurs Bert Niemeijer en Peter van Wijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The degree to which individuals have confidence in the judiciary varies substantially. In this paper, we take the heterogeneity of the population as a starting-point. Our basic idea is that signals about the judiciary acquire significance through frames, schemes of interpretation. Using focus groups we portrayed contrasting frames of citizens. These frames enable us to test the consequences of measures to promote confidence. Measures that tend to increase confidence according to one frame may decrease confidence according to another. This yields dilemmas for those looking for possibilities to promote confidence. One possibility to deal with these dilemmas is to differentiate between different audiences.


Bert Niemeijer
Bert Niemeijer is (bijzonder) hoogleraar rechtssociologie aan de Vrije Universiteit en coördinator strategieontwikkeling bij het ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie. Recente publicaties: ‘Wat leren wetsevaluaties ons over de effectiviteit van wetgeving?’, in: M. Hertogh & H. Weyers (red.), Recht van onderop. Antwoorden uit de rechtssociologie, Nijmegen: Ars Aequi Libri 2011, p. 41-61; ‘De verklaring van geschilgedrag – Gedragseconomische bijdragen en hun beperkingen’, in: W.H. van Boom, I. Giesen & A.J. Verheij (red.), Capita civilologie. Handboek empirie en privaatrecht, Den Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers 2013, p. 109-145 (met C. Klein Haarhuis).

Peter van Wijck
Peter van Wijck is universitair hoofddocent rechtseconomie aan de Universiteit Leiden en coördinator strategieontwikkeling bij het ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie. Recente publicaties: ‘The economics of pre-crime interventions’, European Journal of Law and Economics 2013-35, p. 441-458 en (met Ben van Velthoven), Recht en efficiëntie: een inleiding in de economische analyse van het recht, Deventer: Kluwer, vijfde druk, 2013.
Artikel

Perspectieven van de buiten- en binnenwacht: de institutionele opgave van de rechtspraak

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden internal and external reputation of the courts, value identity of the judiciary, governance of the judiciary
Auteurs Suzan Verberk, Paul Frissen, Paul ´t Hart e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    It is important for the Dutch judiciary to monitor how society, professional partners and litigants perceive the administration of justice. Different polls and studies provide this information. However, up until 2012 little was known about the way top-level (public and private) decision makers and opinion leaders view the functioning of the courts. This prompted the Council for the Judiciary to commission a study on the external reputation of the administration of justice. The results of this study show that there is neither reason for serious concern nor reason for complacency. Criticism was voiced with regard to the operational capacity of the courts, most notably the case processing time and the lack of technical innovation. Also, it was concluded that the judiciary should take a more proactive stance concerning external communication.A couple of months after the study on the external reputation of the courts was completed, some justices of the Court of Appeal Leeuwarden conceived the so-called ‘Manifest’. Among other things, they criticized the caseload, which in their view threatens the independence of judges. Approximately 700 judges supported the Manifest. So lack of internal support rather than lack of external support seemed to pose a problem for the judiciary. What should the judiciary’s course of action be? Whereas the reputation study points to increasing the operational capacity of the courts, the supporters of the Manifest warn that too strong a focus on output would endanger the quality of justice. These contradictory factors demand reflection on the value identity of the judiciary. In our view this requires the Council for the Judiciary to focus less on management and more on governance. For judges this requires that they, through the development of professional standards, define and refine their view on ‘good administration of justice’.


Suzan Verberk
Suzan Verberk is als wetenschappelijk adviseur verbonden aan de Raad voor de rechtspraak en aldaar verantwoordelijk voor het onderzoeksprogramma. Het onderzoeksprogramma staat ten dienste van de vorming en de uitvoering van de strategie van de Raad en beoogt bij te dragen aan vernieuwing van de rechtspraak. Voorheen was zij werkzaam in zowel de beleidsgeoriënteerde als de wetenschappelijke onderzoekspraktijk. Van haar hand verscheen in 2011 Probleemoplossend strafrecht en het ideaal van responsieve rechtspraak (Sdu Uitgevers).

Paul Frissen
Paul Frissen is decaan en bestuursvoorzitter van de Nederlandse School voor Openbaar Bestuur, hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit van Tilburg en lid van de Raad voor Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling. Recente publicaties van zijn hand: Van goede bedoelingen, de dingen die nooit voorbijgaan (Van Gennep 2012, tweede druk 2013) en De fatale staat. Over de politiek noodzakelijke verzoening met tragiek (Van Gennep 2013, derde druk 2013).

Paul ´t Hart
Paul ’t Hart is hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit Utrecht en co-decaan bij de Nederlandse School voor Openbaar Bestuur. Hij schrijft de laatste tien jaar veel over leiderschap in politiek, bestuur en publieke organisaties. Daarnaast verricht hij veel onderzoek naar politiek-bestuurlijk crisismanagement en politiek-ambtelijke verhoudingen. Actuele publicaties zijn Understanding Prime-Ministerial Performance: Comparative Perspectives (Oxford University Press 2013) en The Oxford Handbook of Political Leadership (Oxford University Press 2014).

Stijn Sieckelinck
Stijn Sieckelinck is als sociaal- en wijsgerig-pedagogisch onderzoeker en als docent verbonden aan de vakgroep Pedagogiek van de Universiteit Utrecht. Van zijn hand zijn de onderzoeksrapportages Onbevoegd Gezag. Hoe burgers zelf de gezagscrisis aanpakken en Idealen op drift. Laatstgenoemd boek is een pedagogische kijk op radicalisering van jongeren, waarvan een internationale versie op dit moment wordt ontwikkeld in samenwerking met Deense en Britse onderzoekspartijen.
Artikel

Medical liability: do doctors care?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Ben C.J. van Velthoven en Peter W. van Wijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Van Velthoven and Van Wijck review empirical studies on the effects of tort law in the medical sector. The data they present comes mainly from the US, because from the 1970’s US states have enacted a variety of reforms in their tort systems. This variation has provided very useful data to study preventive effects. The empirical evidence analysed shows that medical malpractice risk affects the behaviour of health care providers. It has a negative impact on the supply of services and it encourages extra diagnostic testing;yet if the additional tests and procedures have any value, it is only a marginal one. Furthermore it has been found that changes in the supply of services do not affect health adversely. This suggests that the physicians who are driven out of business have a below average quality of performance. The authors conclude that, at the margin, medical liability law may have some social benefits after all.


Ben C.J. van Velthoven
Ben van Velthoven is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University. His research interests are: liability issues, civil litigation, and criminal law enforcement.

Peter W. van Wijck
Peter van Wijck is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University and coordinator strategy development at the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice. His research interests concern tort law, contract law, civil litigation, and crime.
Artikel

Recht en burgerschap: een verkenning van modaliteiten

Inleiding bij een symposiumnummer

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden citizenship, sociology of law, juridification, policy
Auteurs Olaf Tans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article analyzes the relation between law and citizenship on the basis of five modalities. This analysis is premised on the observation that citizenship plays a central role in the contemporary debate about the development of political communities. Furthermore it is obvious that citizenship is inextricably linked to law, but it is not easy to get a clear and complete picture of this link. This is due to, on the one hand, the versatility of the concept of citizenship, and the versatility of the phenomenon law on the other. In short, the relation between law and citizenship is multifaceted, which the typology of modalities is meant to reveal.


Olaf Tans
Olaf Tans is als rechtstheoreticus en politiek wetenschapper verbonden aan het Amsterdam University College. In het algemeen houdt hij zich bezig met de relatie tussen recht, ethiek en samenleving. De laatste tijd is hij gericht op onderwerpen als burgerschap, deliberatie en de narratieve benadering van rechtsvinding.
Artikel

Transnational Divorce in Dutch-Moroccan Families

The Semi-Autonomous Social Field of Legal Aid

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2011
Auteurs Iris Sportel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In transnational Dutch-Moroccan divorce cases, spouses can come into contact with two different legal systems. Many different kinds of organisations are involved, offering social and legal advice and aid in these transnational divorces: advising and referring clients, educating spouses and professionals, and influencing policy. In this article these organisations are analysed as participants in a transnational field of legal aid, using Moore’s concept of the semi-autonomous social field. It becomes clear that these organisations share norms on transnational divorce: they frame transnational divorce as a women’s problem, and one of complex, interacting rules and regulations. These norms form the source of rules on how to handle law in transnational Dutch-Moroccan divorce cases.


Iris Sportel
Iris Sportel is a PhD candidate at the Radboud University Nijmegen. She has a BSc in Cultural Anthropology and a BA and MA in Arabic Language and Culture. Since 2008 she has been working on her PhD project ‘Transnational Divorce: between Dutch, Egyptian and Moroccan Law’. She has also done research on a pilot project on tailor-made conflict resolution at the court of Den Bosch and on Islamic saint veneration in Egypt.
Artikel

Citizenship in Transnational Social Spaces

New Ways to Study Socio-legal Boundaries

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2011
Auteurs Thomas Faist
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In order to establish and evaluate the significance of changing socio-legal boundaries and how these are mirrored in citizenship, cross-border formations of the social and citizenship rules must be discussed. The first part of this paper deals with changes in social boundaries across state borders and presents three generations of transnational studies. Based on this, the second part asks how legal boundaries have changed in the case of dual citizenship and supranational social citizenship. Citizenship is a particularly important issue because it sits at the intersection of social and legal boundaries. There is a growing tolerance toward dual citizenship and the evolution of supranational citizenship, one in which migrants enjoy a transnational life that is supported by the implementation of human rights principles in national constitutions, legislation and in European Union court rulings.


Thomas Faist
Thomas Faist is professor in the Department of Sociology, Bielefeld University. His fields of interest are transnational relations, citizenship, development and migration. He held visiting professorships at Brandeis University, Malmö University and the University of Toronto. Thomas Faist serves on the editorial board of The Sociological Quarterly, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Migration Letters, and South Asian Diaspora. He recently co-edited Migration, Development and Transnationalisation: A Critical Stance (Berghahn 2010), Diaspora and Transnationalism: Concepts, Theories and Methods (Amsterdam University Press 2010) and The Migration Development Nexus: Transnational Perspectives (Palgrave Macmillan 2011).
Artikel

Transnational Supermarket Standards in Global Supply Chains

The Emergence and Evolution of GlobalGAP

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2011
Auteurs Jaap Van der Kloet
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent years, West European supermarkets have been playing an active role in the global regulation of food safety. They have developed several transnational food safety standards and compelled suppliers of food products around the world to acquire certification under these standards. Why and how did supermarkets do this? This article explores the emergence and evolution of transnational supermarket standards by analyzing the development of GlobalGAP, one of the most commonly implemented supermarket standards on farms throughout the world. In the literature, the emergence of transnational regulation is often attributed to one or two factors that play an important role at a particular moment in time. The main argument made in this article is that the emergence of transnational supermarket standards is best understood when it is studied as a process. The development of GlobalGAP includes four main characteristics which may be helpful in analyzing the emergence of other transnational private standards.


Jaap Van der Kloet
Jaap Van der Kloet is a PhD candidate at the Institute for Sociology of Law of the Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands. His PhD research focuses on comparing the social working of transnational private food safety standards between local farmers in the Netherlands and Kenya. He has a Master’s degree in International Development Studies. He worked as junior researcher at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and as project leader at the Dutch NGO Fairfood.

    This paper presents a reflection on the theoretical work on the social working of law of the past two decades. It is argued that early assumptions, that legal models were becoming increasingly globalised, creating an increasingly uniform body of law, have not come true. The global spread of neo-capitalism has not only given rise to de-juridification, it has also engendered juridification in which ever more sectors of social life, from small scale to global, are being colonised by law. This development is initiated from above and below in equal measure, and concerns not only the law of nation states, but also law created by other actors, including religious law of various provenance. The paper argues that great progress has been made in understanding how transnational law is generated and how law is transnationalised, but that the ways in which these processes work when actors actually use this transnationalised law in contexts of legal pluralism are not yet adequately understood. The paper presents a perspective on transnationalisation of law that is grounded in space, a perspective that may aid our understanding of the social working of law in transnational contexts. The first section provides a brief survey of some of the main academic approaches to processes of transnationalisation. The second section addresses the issue of location and considers what happens in settings where actors use transnationalising law. The conclusions discuss the value of transnational space and transnational legal space as concepts for the analysis of transnationalising law.


Keebet von Benda-Beckmann
Keebet von Benda-Beckmann is head of the Project Group Legal Pluralism at the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology in Halle. She also holds honorary chairs in social anthropology and legal pluralism at the Universities of Leipzig and Halle. She has carried out research on dispute management, social security, natural resources in West Sumatra, the Moluccas, and in the Netherlands. She has been conducting field research on the effects of decentralisation and reforms of local government in West Sumatra since the fall of the Suharto regime. She has widely published on dispute management, resources, social security, and on theoretical issues of legal pluralism.
Artikel

Transnationalism, Legal Pluralism and Types of Conflicts

Contractual Norms Concerning Domestic Workers

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2011
Auteurs Antoinette Vlieger
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Transnationalism and migration are recognised contributors to legal pluralism. Scholars of legal pluralism state that in conflicts, social actors sustain their claims with arguments from coexisting legal systems. They manoeuvre between different legal systems, or contradicting norms within one system, to achieve the most satisfactory decision in a conflict. In doing so, they use norms as discursive tools. Indeed, according to data on domestic workers in Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, this manoeuvring with norms as discursive tools is often recognisable in conflicts between workers and their employers. However, transnational contractual norms and the legal pluralism they create are not merely discursive tools in existing conflicts; they are also regularly the cause of conflicts. Domestic workers conclude agreements with agents in their countries of origin, while employers conclude agreements with different agents in the destination countries. Both parties believe the other party has signed the same contract, while in reality that is not the case. Because of the differences between the two sets of contractual norms, these norms cause conflicts; they are not merely discursive tools. This finding calls for a division between different types of conflicts, which is proposed here for the purpose of socio-legal analysis of conflicts in general and particularly in situations of transnationalism and legal pluralism.


Antoinette Vlieger
Antoinette Vlieger is a researcher and lecturer at the Law School of the University of Amsterdam. For the last five years she has been researching conflicts between domestic workers and their employers in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Her PhD thesis on this topic is to be published in fall 2011. Thereafter she hopes to do research on the question of why there is little labour protection on the Arabian Peninsula, combining this with hands-on human rights work in the Middle East.

    For a common market, a common patent and a common patent litigation seem self-evident. Although efforts to introduce these common market institutions in Europe started early in the history of the Economic Community, they remained unsuccessful. The reconstruction of this legal history is focused on two theoretical issues.The first concerns the question of power and influence in the EU, in particular the configuration of stakeholders responsible for the non-decision making on this policy issue. The basic mechanism underlying the lack of success of this dossier appears to be a balance of power between the two opposing groups of stakeholders (France and European institutions vs. Germany, UK, supported by their patenting industry and legal experts). This suggests that transnational rule making, proceeding under similar conditions, is likely to have a long (if not unsuccessful) ‘issue career’.The second theoretical issue concerns the agenda-setting mechanisms of recent decades. All initiatives on international or transnational patent policy have mainly been the product of ‘high politics’, although the input of patent legal experts (representatives of ‘low politics’) has increased considerably in recent decades. Further, this history would seem to defy simple schemes of agenda setting. There is no simple sequence of issue initiation, specification, expansion and entrance. At best, it is a series of such sequences.


Alex Jettinghoff
Alex Jettinghoff is a researcher at the Institute for Sociology of Law of the Radboud University Nijmegen. His main research interests are: business contracting and litigation, the role of lawyers in legal change, war and legal transformation, and the practices of intellectual property.
Artikel

In blijde verwachting?

Een analyse van de oordelen van de Commissie Gelijke Behandeling over zwangerschapsdiscriminatie

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 02 2009
Auteurs Kirsten Bolier en Nienke Doornbos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article we report on our research which aimed to investigate which fac-tors influence the outcome of pregnancy discrimination cases of the Dutch Equal Treatment Commission (CGB) and the compliance of respondents with this outcome. We studied equal treatment legislation and all 188 cases between the period of September 1994 and March 2008. The results show that equal treatment legislation hardly leaves any room for objections raised by the re-spondents. The arguments made by the employers are often based on financial or other business-related burdens, even though these arguments are legally irrelevant. We assume that the strictness of the legislation might cause the lack of willingness to comply with the outcome. This presumption is confirmed by the fact that the legal representatives of employers put forward these irrelevant arguments as well. Furthermore, the results show that the nature of the relation of the applicant with the respondent has an influence on the compliance of the respondent with the outcome. Respondents are more likely to comply in cases where the applicant is already working for the employer instead of applying for a job. The results also show that non-profit organizations are more likely to comply with the outcome than profit organizations.


Kirsten Bolier
Kirsten Boliervolgt de Legal Research Master van het Departement Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zij deed in opdracht van de Commissie Gelijke Behandeling onderzoek naar de oordelen met betrekking tot zwangerschapsdiscriminatie. Haar afstudeeronderzoek betreft een juridisch onderzoek naar algemene rechtsbeginselen in het EG-recht.

Nienke Doornbos
Nienke Doornbosis universitair docente Rechtssociologie bij het Depar-tement Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zij promoveerde in 2006 op een rechtssociologisch onderzoek naar de wijze waarop asielzoekers worden gehoord in het kader van de asielprocedure. Haar onderzoeksinteresses betref-fen onder meer de wisselwerking tussen recht en communicatie en het functio-neren van klachten- en geschillenprocedures.
Artikel

De deskundige als rechter

Ondernemingskamer, Penitentiaire Kamer en Pachtkamer

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2010
Trefwoorden deskundigen, betrokkenheid niet-juristen in de rechtspleging, Ondernemingskamer, Penitentiaire Kamer, Pachtkamer, rechtspraak
Auteurs Marijke Malsch
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Experts may be involved in the trial of various types of legal cases. In most cases, they act as an advisor to the court or to the parties. In this model, the so-called ‘advisor model’, the expert writes a report that is used by the court for decision making. Experts may be called to attend the hearing of cases to answer questions that arise regarding their advise. In the other model, the ‘decision model’, the expert forms part of the panel that is in charge of decision making in a case. Decisions in cases are made in co-operation between judges and experts in this model. This model is not used on a large scale; the advisor model is prevailing in Dutch courts.This article discusses advantages and disadvantages of the ‘decision model’. An empirical study to the operation of this model as it is used in a variety of courts is explained. Panels in which experts are included seem to profit from the direct availability of expertise while making decisions in a case. Respondents state that external acceptance of the court decisions is also increased by the involvement of experts in a panel. Participation by experts in these panels is voluminous and they are considered to exert a large influence on the outcomes of decisions.


Marijke Malsch
Marijke Malsch is als senior onderzoeker werkzaam bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving (NSCR) te Amsterdam. Zij is onder meer betrokken bij onderzoeksprojecten over de thema’s ‘Openbaarheid van de strafrechtspleging’, ‘De inbreng van leken in de rechtspraak’, ‘Stalkingswetgeving’ en ‘Deskundigen in het strafrecht’. Daarnaast is zij rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Haarlem en raadsheer-plaatsvervanger bij het Hof Den Bosch.
Artikel

Draagt aansprakelijkheidsrecht bij aan de voedselveiligheid?

Over de preventieve werking van schadeclaims en aansprakelijkheidsverzekering

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2010
Trefwoorden voedselveiligheid, regulering, aansprakelijkheid, aansprakelijkheidsverzekering, preventie, schadeclaim, ‘moreel risico’, voedingsindustrie, productaansprakelijkheid, sociale werking
Auteurs Tetty Havinga
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Most research on food safety has focussed on direct forms of food safety regulation. This paper explores the opportunities for product liability law to encourage food safety measures within firms. It aims to contribute to the discussion on the role public and private actors could have in providing an effective food safety system. Liability law is assumed to promote food safety. The author distinguishes three ways in which liability law could act as an incentive for firms to implement enhanced food safety controls: liability claims, liability insurance and direct effects of liability law on management strategy. The paper concludes that the assumption that liability laws make firms sensitive to prevention of food safety risks is too optimistic. However, liability law could stimulate a culture within firms to take responsibility for food safety. Existing economic and legal analysis could gain from a sociological analysis of the actual impact of liability on company decisions.


Tetty Havinga
Tetty Havinga is universitair hoofddocent bij het Instituut voor Rechtssociologie van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Zij verricht rechtssociologisch onderzoek op diverse terreinen, waaronder de relaties tussen het bedrijfsleven en recht, regulering van voedsel, beleidsuitvoering, arbeidsrecht en gelijke behandeling. Ze is co-auteur van Specialisatie loont?! Ervaringen van ondernemingen met specialistische rechtspraakvoorzieningen (2010).

Joke Kusters
Joke Kusters (joke.kusters@ua.ac.be) studied law at the University of Antwerp and Social and Cultural Anthropology at the University of Leuven. From 2002-2008 she did doctoral research in the field of legal anthropology at the University of Antwerp and during 2009, she was visiting research scholar at the Cardozo School of Law. Her main research areas are the Jewish communities of Antwerp and the state legal approach of Romani culture.
Artikel

Tort, Social Aims and the Iron Cage

On the Relevance of Weber’s Concepts for the Analysis of Tort

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 03 2008
Auteurs Rob Schwitters
Auteursinformatie

Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is Associate Professor Legal Theory at the University of Amsterdam. – 1991 PhD. His research interests include transformations of legal rationality (especially within tort law), risk-society, the symbolic qualities of law, medical decisions concerning the end life. Recent publications: Recht en samenleving in verandering (Kluwer, 2000 & 2008), Over maatmannen en het subjectieve, enkele overwegingen bij de doctrine van het privaatrecht (R&R 2008); Zorgvuldigheid op maat van derden. (Derden in het privaatrecht, Reinhartz c.s. (eds.), Boom 2008).
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.