Zoekresultaat: 12 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid x Jaar 2011 x Rubriek Artikel x
Artikel

Socio-legal Studies in a Transnational World

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2011
Auteurs Jaap Van der Kloet, Betty De Hart en Tetty Havinga
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The concept of transnationalism refers to border-crossing activities and social relations, such as family relations, migration, international trade and international organisations. It is argued that transnationalism is an important topic in the sociology of law for three reasons: the transnationalisation of law (laws travel across borders), the law under transnationalism (transnational processes affect law) and classic socio-legal themes may gain a new and exciting lease of life when used in a transnational context. Transnationalism touches on the core of the sociology of law: studying the relation between law and society and the social working of law. Socio-legal scholars should look beyond the national borders, include non-state actors in their analysis and take notice of how rules are used in different localities.


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.

Betty De Hart
Betty De Hart is associate professor at the Institute for Sociology of Law and the Centre for Migration Law of the Radboud University Nijmegen. She gained her PhD in 2003 with a socio-legal study of Dutch nationals with a migrant partner. She has published widely on family law, migration law and nationality law. Her interest is in the meaning of law in everyday life and in gender, ethnicity and diversity issues. In 2008, she received a personal VIDI grant for excellent researchers from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) for the international comparative research programme ‘Transnational Families between Dutch and Islamic Family Law’.

Tetty Havinga
Tetty Havinga is associate professor of sociology of law at the Radboud University Nijmegen. She publishes on the regulation of food safety, policy implementation and law enforcement, experiences of large companies with specialised courts, equal opportunities law, and migration. She is particularly interested in relations between industry and law related to the public interest.
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

Wonen, wijken en diversiteit

Een interpretatieve beleidsanalyse van de legitimering van de relatie tussen huisvesting en integratie in ‘probleemwijken’

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden legitimacy, housing, integration, interpretative policy analysis
Auteurs Marleen van der Haar en Ashley Terlouw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article we study ways in which the relationship between housing and integration of migrants are being justified and legitimated in policy documents from the cities of Arnhem and Nijmegen. Making use of a critical frame analysis, we are particularly interested in the assumptions made with regard to the preferred population composition of neighbourhoods, images of ‘normality’ and ‘the ideal society’. Based on the analysis of a set of policy documents (such as the most recent coalition agreement, housing policy document and several neighbourhood plans of each city) and a pilot study that includes interviews with local administrators and residents of twelve neighbourhoods, we found that most problems that are being related to residential segregation in neighbourhoods are defined in socio-economic terms. In general, the data show that the mixing of people with different socio-economic positions is thought to be the solution to this problem. References to migrants are mainly indirect: many documents mention that a large part of the poor people are migrants. The issue of integration is mostly dealt with in documents that focus on so-called ‘problem neighbourhoods’. We conclude that the desirability of diverse neighbourhoods in terms of types of housing and groups of people is widespread. Yet the assumptions on which these ideas are built remain largely implicit.


Marleen van der Haar
Marleen van der Haar is postdoc onderzoeker en docent bij het Institute for Management Research, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Op dit moment doet zij (samen met Mieke Verloo en Iris van Huis) een studie naar organisaties in de publieke sector die projecten uitvoeren met als doel bepaalde mannen te emanciperen en te activeren. Hiervoor deed zij (samen met Dvora Yanow) aan de Vrije Universiteit onderzoek naar de implicaties van het gebruik van de beleidstermen allochtoon en autochtoon. In 2007 promoveerde zij op een proefschrift over de manieren waarop professionele repertoires van maatschappelijk werkers beïnvloed worden door hulpverlening aan een cultureel divers cliëntenbestand. Kenmerkend voor haar werk is het gebruik van een combinatie van kritische frameanalyse en etnografisch onderzoek.

Ashley Terlouw
Ashley Terlouw is hoogleraar rechtssociologie aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Zij studeerde rechten aan de Universiteit Utrecht en werkte onder meer als wetenschappelijk medewerker bij het stafbureau Vreemdelingenzaken van de Rechtbank Den Haag en als hoofd van de afdeling Vluchtelingen bij Amnesty International Nederland. In 2003 promoveerde zij aan de Radboud Universiteit op een rechtssociologisch onderzoek naar samenwerking tussen vreemdelingenrechters. In de periode 2004-2008 was zij als commissielid verbonden aan de Commissie gelijke behandeling. Zij publiceert op het gebied van gelijke behandeling, rechtspleging en migratierecht.
Artikel

Comparitierechters in eenzelfde zaak vergeleken: de individuele aanpak van rechters

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden civil hearing, courts, dispute resolution, individual approach
Auteurs Silke Praagman
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, the way in which judges behave and communicate during hearings is increasingly being emphasized. This is related to the implementation of post-defence appearance in Dutch civil hearings (comparitie na antwoord) and a more general, albeit cautious, shift from dispute resolution, focused solely on resolving the legal aspects of a case, towards broader conflict resolution, in which other aspects of a case are considered too. This article compares how six judges managed a civil hearing of the same case. It seeks to explain the different outcomes that resulted from these judges’ hearings (i.e. settlement/judgement/referral to mediator) and seeks to identify what different ways of managing hearings imply for a possible shift from dispute resolution to conflict resolution. The empirical study found that the judges’ preparation of the case and their way of beginning and structuring the hearing were very similar; they also discussed similar subjects. Differences were found in how the judges interacted with the parties; the skills they used during hearings; how they used a specific skill; and in how they guided parties in the decision-making process about the outcome. No strong correlation emerged between a specific type of hearing management and the type of outcome selected. Interviews with the judges suggest that the explanation for the different outcomes lies partly in the judges’ personal views (on the appropriate outcome). Such beliefs influence how the judges manage a civil hearing, and indirectly the outcome of a case as well. These findings imply that for a shift from dispute resolution to conflict resolution to materialize, this will require judges to develop a common understanding of their responsibilities and to enhance their skills. They will also need to verify their assumptions more, so that the parties’ needs and the judge’s personal beliefs are better matched.


Silke Praagman
Silke Praagman heeft de VSR-scriptieprijs 2010 gewonnen. Zij studeerde rechtsgeleerdheid aan de Universiteit Utrecht en de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Tijdens haar studie werkte zij als junior medewerker bij het Landelijk bureau Mediation naast rechtspraak. In dit kader was zij betrokken bij onderzoek naar de verwijzingsvoorziening naar mediation en de werkwijze van rechters. Ook heeft zij tijdens het schrijven van haar scriptie als buitengriffier bij de Rechtbank Rotterdam binnen de sector civiel gewerkt.
Artikel

Verzet tegen gedoogbeleid: iets typisch rechts?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2011
Trefwoorden punitive turn, political conservatism, ‘gedoogbeleid’, administrative tolerance
Auteurs Peter Mascini en Dick Houtman
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article demonstrates on the basis of a representative survey among the Dutch population (N=1,892) that it is not necessarily politically ‘rightist’ or ‘conservative’ to resist the toleration of illegal activities (‘gedoogbeleid’). Even though, generally speaking, political conservatives are most likely to be critical, this is merely because they unconsciously associate the latter with practices of tolerating illegal activities by marginal individuals. Whereas conservatives hence oppose the latter more than political progressives do, the latter for their part are more critical than conservatives about tolerating illegal activities by official agencies. These findings illustrate that gedoogbeleid does not have a universal legitimacy in the eyes of the public, but that its legitimacy is determined case by case by the concrete aims and targets addressed by this policy instrument.


Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini is universitair docent sociologie aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op de legitimiteit, uitvoering en handhaving van publiek beleid. Hierover heeft hij onder andere gepubliceerd in Law and Policy, Regulation and Governance, British Journal of Criminology, International Migration Review en Tijdschrift voor Criminologie.

Dick Houtman
Dick Houtman is als hoogleraar cultuursociologie verbonden aan het Centre for Rotterdam Cultural Sociology (CROCUS) van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Hij verricht overwegend onderzoek naar de spiritualisering van religie en de culturalisering van de politiek in hedendaagse westerse samenlevingen. Zijn twee recentste boeken zijn Religions of modernity (2010; red. met Stef Aupers) en Paradoxes of individualization (in druk; met Stef Aupers en Willem de Koster).
Artikel

Van besluit tot beslechting: ervaringen van burgers met de bezwaarprocedure

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2011
Trefwoorden objection procedure, procedural justice, citizens’ experiences, qualitative study
Auteurs Mirjan Oude Vrielink en Boudewijn de Waard
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The GALA lays down general rules that in principle apply to the entire field of administrative law. If a decision by an administrative body can be appealed to a court, the general rule is that an objection procedure must be followed before the matter can be taken to court. Recently, research has been conducted to survey citizens’ experiences before and during objection procedures, as well as factors influencing these experiences. The research was divided into a quantitative research and a subsequent qualitative study to gain insight into the underlying mechanisms. The article reports about the major findings of the qualitative study.
    On the whole, the interviewees appreciated their treatment at the hearing. They indicated that they were able to expound their position (voice), that their arguments were taken seriously (trustworthiness), and that they were treated with respect (interpersonal respect). On these elements, the qualitative study paints a slightly rosier picture than the quantitative study.
    The most critical comments on the hearing we recorded concerned the attitude of those representing the administrative authority in cases that were considered by an independent committee. That attitude was often judged to be rigid and the respondents were annoyed by the appearance at the hearing of (‘yet’) another official than the one(s) they had previously been in contact with.
    Many administrative bodies have chosen to use an informal approach which implies the use of mediation skills, after an objection has been lodged. When informal resolution was attempted, the response of the interviewees concerned was by no means invariably positive, and in some cases even distinctly negative.
    The interviews showed that the objectors would have preferred to have had more information about the actual objection procedure in detail and in advance. A number of interviewees indicated that they felt very uncomfortable when certain procedural aspects were sprung on them, such as the presence of the opposing party (which they had not expected) and a medical examination being carried out. Ambiance matters. It was found that the perceived level of treatment could be influenced by subtle expressions of social etiquette. The research shows that objectors set great store by a proper reception and value the physical layout of the hearing venue.


Mirjan Oude Vrielink
Mirjan Oude Vrielink is bestuurskundige en promoveerde op een rechtssociologisch proefschrift. Zij werkt als senior onderzoeker aan de Universiteit Twente. In deze functie is zij momenteel betrokken bij twee projecten: ‘Burgers maken hun buurt’ en ‘Evaluatie Wijkcoaches Velve-Lindenhof’. Belangrijke thema’s in haar wetenschappelijke onderzoek zijn burgerparticipatie, zelfregulering en coregulering, horizontale verantwoording, goed bestuur en de rol van professionals. Met B.R. Dorbeck-Jung e.a. publiceerde zij recent het artikel ‘Contested hybridization of regulation: Failures of the Dutch regulatory system to protect minors from harmful media’ (Regulation and Governance 2010-4(2), p. 113-260).

Boudewijn de Waard
Boudewijn de Waard is hoogleraar Staats- en Bestuursrecht aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Daarvóór was hij verbonden aan de juridische faculteit van de Universiteit van Utrecht (1980-1991), laatstelijk als universitair hoofddocent. Van 1977 tot 1980 was Boudewijn de Waard advocaat te Utrecht.
Artikel

Dienstbodes in Saoedi-Arabië; intersectionaliteit en toegang tot het recht

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden domestic workers, Saudi Arabia, patriarchy, access to justice
Auteurs Antoinette Vlieger
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Domestic workers in Saudi Arabia suffer from severely limited access to justice, which affects the conflicts they may have with their employers. As there is no bargaining in the shadow of the law, the more powerful party, employer, can usually enforce their preferred outcome. This article focuses on the question of why domestic workers’ access to justice is so limited; are the underlying causes comparable to the ones in other countries, or does it concern an issue specific to Saudi Arabia? Literature on domestic workers points at both gender and citizenship as factors that weaken the position of these female migrant workers in many societies. This article discusses to what extent these two factors limit access to justice in Saudi Arabia and concludes with some critical remarks concerning the concept of intersectionality.


Antoinette Vlieger
Antoinette Vlieger is docent-onderzoeker aan de juridische faculteit van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. De afgelopen vijf jaar deed zij onderzoek naar conflicten tussen dienstbodes en hun werkgevers in Saoedi-Arabië en de Verenigde Arabische Emiraten. Op 21 december aanstaande zal zij haar proefschrift hierover verdedigen. Zij heeft lesgegeven in verschillende juridische en metajuridische vakken. Hierna hoopt zij nieuw onderzoek te doen, bijvoorbeeld naar de vraag wat de verschillende relaties zijn tussen olie, migratiestromen en de ontwikkeling van arbeidsrecht. Ook hoopt zij te kunnen bijdragen aan de verbetering van de positie van met name vrouwen en migranten in het Midden-Oosten.
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.