Zoekresultaat: 7 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen x
Artikel

Access_open Verbanning uit het semipublieke domein

Toegangsverboden in juridisch perspectief

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden The semi-public domain, Misconduct, Exclusion orders, Civil court, Complaints committees
Auteurs Mr. dr. Mandy van Rooij
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The semi-public domain covers the places that are accessible to the public but which are controlled by private entities. Shopping malls, public transport, bars and sports events are examples of such places. In case of misconduct, the private manager may impose exclusion orders. This sanction relies on legal contracts and the exclusive nature of the right to property. The legal framework consists therefore primarily of private law. Exclusion orders may not be imposed without reason. Prevention of disorder and harm may be a legitimate reason. The length and range of the ban must relate to the gravity of the disruption. In addition to this, public laws on non-discrimination and privacy are applicable. The civil court is competent to check the exclusion orders in de semi-public domain. The author sees added value in complaints committees, in which both public and private actors partake. Complaint committees can thrive if their assessment frameworks are transparent.


Mr. dr. Mandy van Rooij
Mr. dr. A.E. van Rooij verdedigde in 2017 aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam haar proefschrift Orde in het semipublieke domein. Particuliere en publiek-private orderegulering in juridisch perspectief, uitgegeven bij Boom juridisch (Den Haag). Deze bijdrage is gebaseerd op dit promotieonderzoek. Inmiddels is zij werkzaam als wetgevingsjurist bij het ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties en verbonden als onderzoeker aan de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de VU.
Artikel

Toezicht in de Wiv 2017

Kansen en uitdagingen voor een effectief en sterk toezichtstelsel

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Intelligence and Security Services Act 2017, Oversight, Effectiveness, Safeguards, Mass Surveillance
Auteurs Mr. dr. Mireille Hagens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The new Intelligence and Security Services Act 2017 has generated a lot of criticism in The Netherlands. Although the act was adopted in parliament in July 2017, the implementation will take place in May 2018. Beforehand an advisory referendum will give the public the opportunity to express their opinion on the new act: the modernisation of the investigatory powers of the services and the strengthening of the necessary safeguards and oversight mechanisms. Both have met with their share of criticism. In this paper the focus is on the enhanced oversight mechanism. It is argued that although different choices could have been made regarding the organisation of oversight, the new system fulfills the requirements set by the European Court of Human Rights. The real question is whether the new act provides for effective and strong oversight in practice to ensure a proper balance between national security and privacy protection in this digital era. The opportunities and challenges are explored.


Mr. dr. Mireille Hagens
Mr. dr. M. Hagens is senior-onderzoeker bij de Commissie van Toezicht op de Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten (CTIVD) en gastonderzoeker bij de faculteit Recht, Economie, Bestuur en Organisatie van de Universiteit Utrecht. Deze bijdrage is op persoonlijke titel geschreven.
Artikel

De Wiv 2002 en Wiv 2017 op enkele hoofdlijnen vergeleken

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden New Intelligence and Security Services Act, Advisory referendum, Powers of intelligence and security services, Safeguards, Supervision
Auteurs Drs. Rob Dielemans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Last year, Dutch parliament approved the proposal for a new Intelligence and Security Services Act (Wiv 2017). This law will replace the current Intelligence and Security Services Act 2002 (Wiv 2002). The Wiv 2017 should be considered feasible with effect from 1 May 2018. Before that time however, an advisory referendum on the new law will be held on 21 March. This article first discusses the nature of the law and the need for innovation. Subsequently, a comparison of both laws takes place in general terms, with regard to the powers of the intelligence and security services, the safeguards, the supervision, the complaint handling and the international cooperation between intelligence and security services. It is argued that the extension of the powers of the services in the Wiv 2017 is only limited in scope, while the safeguards have been considerably strengthened. The introduction of a binding judgment in complaint handling also contributes to a better and more effective legal protection for citizens.


Drs. Rob Dielemans
Drs. R.J.I. Dielemans is werkzaam bij de Directie Constitutionele Zaken en Wetgeving van het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties. Dit artikel is op persoonlijke titel geschreven.
Artikel

Data Protection by Design als argument in het FBI vs. Apple-debat

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden FBI vs. Apple, Data Protection by Design, Data Protection by Default, GDPR, privacy
Auteurs Dr. C. Cuijpers en S. van Schendel LLB
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Adhering to a strict interpretation, Data Protection by Design (DPbD) can conflict with the needs of law enforcement in their fight against terrorism and criminality. An illustration of this tension can be found in the case of FBI vs. Apple, where the FBI wants Apple to help bypass security on an iPhone in order to gain access to data. The FBI needs the help of Apple – or third parties – to get such access, for which they might need to create new legal mandates. However, private parties like Apple, may want to design their products in such a way that evading and breaking the security of the system is not possible, as consumers demand secure and privacy friendly devices. This article adds to this debate by posing DPbD as an argument in favor of private parties not to cooperate in making their products less secure and less privacy friendly. This argument is especially relevant when a similar case unfolds in the EU under the new regime of the General Data Protection Regulation in which DPbD is explicitly embedded.


Dr. C. Cuijpers
Dr. Colette Cuijpers is als Associate Professor verbonden aan het Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society (TILT).

S. van Schendel LLB
Sascha van Schendel, LLB is als student-assistent verbonden aan het Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society (TILT).
Artikel

Politie en beeldtechnologie: gebruik, opbrengsten en uitdagingen

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden CCTV, bodycams, ANPR, smart cameras, police
Auteurs Drs. S. Flight
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Dutch National Police deploys video technology, for instance body-worn video camera (bodycams), drones, helicopters with cameras, and mobile units for surveillance. Four types of video technology are discussed: CCTV, bodycams, smart cameras and automatic number plate recognition (ANPR). These four types will be the most prominent applications of visual technology in the coming years, according to ‘Vision on sensing’, published in 2015 by the National Police. The potential benefits of video images for prosecution and in the courtroom are discussed in a separate paragraph, followed by a survey of recent changes in the laws regulating this technology.


Drs. S. Flight
Drs. Sander Flight is zelfstandig adviseur en onderzoeker op het terrein van veiligheid en criminaliteit.
Artikel

De Nederlandse staat van internetvrijheid

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 6 2012
Trefwoorden internet freedom, legislation the Netherlands, retainment of customer data, privacy, net neutrality
Auteurs O.L. van Daalen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    When thinking of restrictions on internet freedom, people often look to countries such as Egypt and Libya. But internet freedom in countries such as the Netherlands also warrants close examination. This article discusses a selection of Dutch measures which infringe on the fundamental right to privacy and communication freedom on the internet. With regard to privacy, it starts with the Dutch law requiring telecommunications providers to retain customer data, such as all records and location data. Also the plans to monitor internet traffic by the intelligence services as well as the lack of transparency on data requests by the Dutch government are discussed. With regard to communications freedom, the new Dutch law on net neutrality is analysed and described as positive for internet freedom. However, the author also sees developments threatening internet freedom. He mentions plans to introduce web blocking for websites facilitating copyright infringement and a draft law to allow the police to take down websites without judicial intervention. The author argues that the Netherlands should significantly improve its own state of internet freedom, especially if it wants to credibly claim that other countries should protect internet freedom.


O.L. van Daalen
Mr. Ot van Daalen is directeur van de digitale burgerrechtenbeweging Bits of Freedom.
Titel

Convergerende technologieën, verschuivende verantwoordelijkheden

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 01 2008
Trefwoorden Aansprakelijkheid, Handhaving, Idee, Strafrecht, Privacy, Legitimiteit, Menselijke gedraging, Noodzakelijkheid, Observatie, Technische ontwikkeling
Auteurs Vedder, A.

Vedder, A.
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.