Zoekresultaat: 5 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Jaar 2016 x Rubriek Discussion x
Discussie

Access_open Positieve criminologie

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden securitas, rule of law, Polizeiwissenschaft, politeia, democracy
Auteurs prof. dr. Bob Hoogenboom
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Positive security is a very promising development in criminology. The ‘movement’ reconnects the current debate on crime with the origins of ancient Greek thinking on the positive nature of politeia, policy and policing. Securitas - providing safety and security for the common good - has a long and rich tradition. Good governance is about many things, but foremost about providing security in society. Polizeiwissenschaft in 18th and 19th century Prussia made a distinction between Wohlfahrt- and Sicherheitspolizei.
    The latter is outright dangerous because security becomes equated with negative connotations: the other, the enemies of the state, the drug war and more recently the war in terror. In times like these the positive qualities of securitas become inflated. Human rights, privacy and the rule of law are no longer viewed in positive terms. Therefore I advocate the positive security movement. But the author is worried about two things. Firstly, the current Zeitgeist which is charged with xenophobia and war like languages. And, secondly the fact that the ‘movement’ is limited to a few rebels with a cause. The mainstream of criminology is not really interested in reconnecting with the philosophical positive roots of securitas. Mainstream criminology fosters the status quo and is financially too depended on the state to actually follow the new heroes of positivity. The only way out is to develop a following but this requires academics to actually take a stand.


prof. dr. Bob Hoogenboom
Prof. dr. Bob Hoogenboom is hoogleraar fraude en regulering aan de Nyenrode Business Universiteit.
Discussie

Het episodisch geheugen en getuigenverhoor: wat moeten politieverhoorders hiervan weten?

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Episodic memory, Interviewing witnesses, Quality interviews, Police practice
Auteurs Drs. Imke Rispens en Adri van Amelsvoort
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Last year the article ‘Episodic memory and interviewing witnesses. What do police interviewers know about this topic?’ (Odinot, Boon & Wolters, 2015, TvC, 57(3), 279-299) was published in this journal. The article describes a study that explored the knowledge of police interviewers about episodic memory. The researchers concluded that police interviewers had insufficient knowledge of episodic memory and that this was related to the lack of psychological terms in the manual of the curriculum of police training. In this article we describe the lack of scientific consensus about episodic memory and the consequences of this for doing research with lists with theses about this subject. Differences between interviewing witnesses and suspects will be discussed. We also question whether it is necessary that police interviewers have thorough knowledge of episodic memory. More important is what knowledge does police need when doing interviews and how are these conducted? Some factors have a negative impact on the quality of those interviews, so we end up with some recommendations for improving the quality of interviews in police practice.


Drs. Imke Rispens
Drs. I.W. Rispens is recherchepsycholoog en als docent en gedragswetenschapper werkzaam bij de Politieacademie.

Adri van Amelsvoort
A.G. van Amelsvoort is freelance senior adviseur en docent. Hij was daarvoor hoofdinspecteur van politie in de functie van teamleider en kennismakelaar bij de Politieacademie. Hij is redacteur van de recherche-onderwerpen in de digitale kennisbank van Stapel & De Koning.
Discussie

UNGASS 2016: in de Weense houdgreep

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden UNGASS, drug policy, war on drugs, harm reduction
Auteurs Pien Metaal MA
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution aims to discuss the main outcomes of the recent UNGASS (United Nations General Assembly Special Session) on Drugs that took place in New York from 19 to 21 April 2016. Based on my own participation in the preparatory discussions and political negotiations as civil society representative (through the work of NGO Transnational Institute), I argue that political divisions and entrenched institutional dynamics have transformed what could have been the beginning of the end of the war on drugs into a wasted opportunity for changing the status quo of the present world regime regarding the production, trafficking and use of illegal drugs. Despite high initial expectations after several governments expressed a clear concern about the effects of purely repressive policies, and the UN decision to organize the session 3 years earlier than planned, very soon it was clear that the session would not imply real changes in the current policies. The agenda setting was non-transparent and controlled by the most conservative factions and countries, largely excluding the views from NGO’s and academics in the final adopted resolution. The final document poorly reflects the rich discussions and developments that are taking place in many countries of the world, particularly the debates and policy developments in ‘the Americas’. A positive note is that the unchanged international UN conventions on drugs can hardly cope with developments taking place on cannabis policies in countries such as Canada, Uruguay, United States or Jamaica. Also other countries are more and more prepared to push for change on other essential questions, including the application of death penalty for drug offences, the access to controlled medicines, or the explicit application of ‘harm reduction’ approaches.


Pien Metaal MA
Pien Metaal, MA, is programmacoördinator van het Drugs & Democracy programma van het Transnational Institute (TNI), waar ze werkzaam is sinds 2002. Ze heeft veel artikelen, rapporten en bijdragen voor boeken geschreven over drugsbeleid in Latijns Amerika sinds 1996.

Nick Huls
Nick Huls is emeritus hoogleraar rechtssociologie aan de Erasmus School of Law en de Universiteit Leiden. Hij is tevens a visiting professor aan de Law Faculty of the University of Pretoria.

J. Kien
J. Kien was tot december 2015 avocat au Barreau de Paris en advocaat te Rotterdam. Voorheen was hij juridisch directeur bij Alstom Transport Azië en Grote Projecten bij EDF. Hij treedt geregeld op als arbiter in internationale geschillen.
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.