Zoekresultaat: 22 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid x Jaar 2016 x
Artikel

“The production of law”: Law in action in the everyday and the juridical consequences of juridification

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden juridification, production of space, law in action, local bye-laws
Auteurs dr. mr. Danielle Chevalier
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In an increasingly diversifying society, public space is the quintessential social realm1x Lofland 1998. where members of that diverse society meet each other. Thus space is shared, whilst norms regarding that space are not always shared. Of rivalling norms, some are codified into formal law, in a process Habermas called juridification. Early Habermas regarded juridification a negative process, ‘colonizing the lifeworld’. Later Habermas argued juridification a viable pillar for conviviality in diversity. The shift in Habermas’ perspective invites the question how law works in action. In this article a frame is offered to scrutinize the working of law in action in public space, by applying the conceptual triad of spatial thinker Lefebvre to understand how law is “produced”. It argues that how law is perceived in action is pivotal to understanding how law works in action. Moreover, it discusses the possible ramifications of the perception of law in action for how the legal system as a whole is perceived.

Noten

  • 1 Lofland 1998.


dr. mr. Danielle Chevalier
Danielle Chevalier is a lecturer and research fellow at the University of Amsterdam, affiliated to both the Bonger Institute for Criminology and the Amsterdam School for Social Science Research. Her academic works focuses on the intersection of the legal and the spatial, positioned within the frames of urban sociology, criminology and legal sociology. More specifically she researches legal interventions in the urban realm through qualitative methods, and publishes both on law in action and research methods. Her current project centers on the development of the concept 'emotional ownership of public space'.
Artikel

The precaution controversy: an analysis through the lens of Ulrich Beck and Michel Foucault

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Precautionary principle, risk society, governmentality, risk governance, environmental law
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    According to the precautionary principle lack of scientific evidence for the existence of a certain (environmental) risk should not be a reason not to take preventative policy measures. The precautionary principle had a stormy career in International environmental law and made its mark on many treaties, including the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). However it remains controversial. Proponents see it as the necessary legal curb to keep the dangerous tendencies of industrial production and technology in check. Opponents regard it with suspicion. They fear it will lead to a decrease in freedom and fear the powers to intervene that it grants the state. In this article the principle is reviewed from the perspectives of Ulrich Beck’s ‘reflexive modernisation’ and Michel Foucault’s notion of governmentality. It is argued that from Beck’s perspective the precautionary principle is the result of a learning process in which mankind gradually comes to adopt a reflexive attitude to the risks modernity has given rise to. It represents the wish to devise more inclusive and democratic policies on risks and environmental hazards. From the perspective of Michel Foucault however, the principle is part and parcel of neo-liberal tendencies of responsibilisation. Risk management and prudency are devolved to the public in an attempt to minimise risk taking, while at the same time optimising production. Moreover, it grants legitimacy to state intervention if the public does not live up to the responsibilities foisted on it. Both perspectives are at odds, but represent different sides of the same coin and might learn from each other concerns.


Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is a socio-legal scholar affiliated with the University of Amsterdam Law School and the PPLE honours college. Next to lecturing on a variety of subjects, he focusses on interdisciplinary legal research into the possibilities of law to deal with contemporary social problems.
Artikel

Framing labor contracts: Contract versus network theories

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden contract theory, Network theory, Labor regulation, subjectivity, performativity
Auteurs Robert Knegt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Since the 18th century the ‘contractual model’ has become both a paradigm of social theories (f.i. ‘rational choice’) and a dominant model of structuring labour relations. Its presupposition of the subjectivity of individual actors as a given is criticized with reference to network-based theories (Latour, Callon) and to analyses of Foucault. The current contract model of labour relations is analyzed from a historical perspective on normative regimes of labour relations, that imply different conceptions of ‘subjectivity’. Research into the regulation of labour relations requires an analysis in terms of an entanglement of human beings, technologies and legal discourse.


Robert Knegt
Senior researcher at Hugo Sinzheimer Institute, University of Amsterdam
Redactioneel

Social Theory and Legal Practices

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen, Dr. Robert Knegt en Associate Professor Rob Schwitters
Auteursinformatie

Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is a socio-legal scholar affiliated with the University of Amsterdam Law School and the PPLE honours college. Next to lecturing on a variety of subjects, he focusses on interdisciplinary legal research into the possibilities of law to deal with contemporary social problems.

Dr. Robert Knegt
Dr. Robert Knegt is Guest Researcher at the Hugo Sinzheimer Institute, University of Amsterdam. As a sociologist of law, he has been project leader of numerous research projects that combine legal and sociological methods in the field of labour relations. He is particularly interested in a historical-sociological study of long-term developments in the normative structuration of labour relations.

Associate Professor Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is Associate Professor of Sociology of Law and connected to the Paul Scholten Centre at the University of Amsterdam. He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state and compliance.
Artikel

Opinio juris as epistème: A constructivist approach to the use of contested concepts in legal doctrine

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Opinio juris, Interpretive concepts, Customary law, Constructivism, Pierre Bourdieu, Peter Berger & Thomas Luckmann
Auteurs Associate Professor Olaf Tans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Seeing that the role of opinio juris in the identification of customary international law is essentially contested, this contribution seeks to explain how this concept plays a fruitful role in legal doctrine despite of, or perhaps even due to, this essential contestedness. To that effect the paper adopts a constructivist perspective, primarily drawing from Bourdieu’s theory of practice and Berger & Luckmann’s ideas about institutionalization. In this perspective, contested concepts such as opinio juris are conceived of as multifaceted tools of knowledge production in the hands of members of epistemic communities.


Associate Professor Olaf Tans
Olaf Tans works as legal philosopher and political scientist at Amsterdam University College and the Centre for the Politics of Transnational Law. His contribution to this special issue is part of a research line focusing on the social construction of normativity in legal doctrine. He has also published about constitutionalism, citizenship, democracy, and most recently (e.g. in Ratio Juris and Law & Literature) about the use of foundational narratives in public deliberation and law-finding.
Artikel

Autonomy of law in Indonesia

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Rule of law, Indonesia, Socio-legal studies, Legal scholarhip, Judiciary
Auteurs Professor Adriaan Bedner
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article seeks to answer how useful the theoretical approaches developed in Europe and the United States are for explaining or understanding the autonomy of law in Indonesia – a nation that is on the verge of becoming a lower-middle-income country and whose legal system presents many of the features found in other developing countries’ legal systems. The article first sketches three lines of theoretical thought that have dominated the inquiry into autonomy of law in (Western) sociology and then assesses to what extent they are represented in the socio-legal studies of Indonesian law. The conclusion is that although socio-legal scholars studying developing countries need supplementary concepts and theories, they can use the Western ones as their point of departure in understanding the functioning of law in a setting that is very different from the one in which these theories were developed.


Professor Adriaan Bedner
Adriaan Bedner is professor of law and society in Indonesia at the Van Vollenhoven Institute (Leiden Law School). He has worked on many different subjects within this field, including family law, administrative courts, and environmental law. His present focus is on the Indonesian Ombudsman and on legal education.
Artikel

Social theory and the significance of free will in our system of criminal justice

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden free will, determinism, communicative action, legitimacy, social theory
Auteurs Dr. Rob Schwitters
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Free will is a key assumption of our system of criminal justice. However, the assumption of a free will is questioned by the rapidly growing empirical findings of the neuro and the brain sciences. These indicate that human behavior is driven by subconscious forces beyond the free will. In this text I aim to indicate how social theory might contribute to this debate. This text is an attempt to demonstrate that social theory does not automatically side with the deterministic attacks on free will. The denial of the free will is to a great extent based on a flawed interpretation of free will, in which it is seen as a capacity of separate individuals. I will suggest that it is the sociological realization that free will is embedded in intersubjective relations that helps to clarify which value is at stake when we deny free will. Free will presumes social practices and social relations that facilitate moral and political discourse. As long as we see human actors as capable to evaluate these practices and contexts in moral and political terms, we cannot deny them a free will. My argumentation will build on the theories of Peter Strawson, Anthony Giddens and Jürgen Habermas.


Dr. Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is Associate Professor of Sociology of Law and connected to the Paul Scholten Centre at the University of Amsterdam. He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state and compliance.
Boekbespreking

Soft-drugs, morality and law in Late Modernity

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden review-essay, proefschrift Chevallier, blow-verbod, symbolic crusade, culture of control
Auteurs Thaddeus Müller
Auteursinformatie

Thaddeus Müller
Thaddeus Müller is senior onderzoeker bij de Law School, Lancaster University (criminology). Hij is gespecialiseerd in kwalitatieve methoden en zijn belangstelling gaat uit naar de sociale constructie van perspectieven op veiligheid in publieke ruimten, in het bijzonder in multi-culturele buurten. Een ander thema dat zijn belangstelling heeft is de constructie en ontwikkeling van het softdrugs-beleid in Nederland en over de grenzen. Thaddeus Müller heeft ook gepubliceerd over andere thema’s, met name over de marginalisering van etnische jongeren in de laat-moderniteit, vooral in de context van het strafrechtstelsel, academische fraude (gerelateerd aan de organisatie van academische instellingen), met name de Diederik Stapel-zaak en over Rock en Roll, in het bijzonder Lou Reed.
Redactioneel

Waarheen leidt de weg…?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden review process, VSR, editorial, journal rankings
Auteurs Peter Mascini
Auteursinformatie

Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini is hoogleraar Empirical Legal Studies aan de Erasmus School of Law, de universiteit waaraan hij ook verbonden is als universitair hoofddocent Sociologie bij de Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op legitimering, uitvoering en handhaving van wetgeving en beleid.

Elbert de Jong
Elbert de Jong is postdoc aan het Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law (UCALL). Zijn expertise richt zich in het bijzonder op het aansprakelijkheidsrecht en (rechterlijke) risicoregulering. Hij heeft veel gepubliceerd op het terrein van gezondheids- en milieurisico’s en het aansprakelijkheidsrecht. In zijn proefschrift ‘Voorzorgverplichtingen’ behandelt hij hoe de civiele rechter de vereiste omgang met onzekere risico’s dient vast te stellen, en hoe verschillende wetenschappelijke onzekerheden over risico’s daarbij dienen mee te wegen. Thans onderzoekt hij hoever de rechter mag gaan in het corrigeren van (vermeend) falend overheidsbeleid bij gezondheids- en milieurisico’s.
Discussie

KEI en ODR: hand in hand vooruit

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden ODR, online courts, access to justice, ADR
Auteurs Mr. dr. Jin Ho Verdonschot
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Is online dispute resolution (ODR) the way to organise 100% access to justice? Or is it more of a bubble-solution looking for a problem? Experiences are mixed but there are reasons to be optimistic. A Dutch example of an online divorce platform show how technology can better serve the justice needs of citizens. But for that we need to stop thinking in terms of ADR, ODR and court litigation but rather design more hybrid processes.


Mr. dr. Jin Ho Verdonschot
Jin Ho Verdonschot is directeur HiiL Rechtwijzer Technology en een van de grondleggers van het Rechtwijzer platform.
Discussie

KEI voorbij met ODR

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden ODR, Courts, court users, dispute resolution, digital court
Auteurs Dory Reiling
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    ‘I felt so sorry for you, such a lovely tool, and then you have no users!’ This was one of the comments after my presentation of the eKantonrechter at ODR 2016, organized by HiiL in The Hague in May 2016. ODR, online dispute resolution, was presented as a tool to solve all problems in the 4th Trend Report by HIIL after the conference. Arno Lodder, in a weblog, commented that ODR had raised hopes in its early promoters, but had not really taken off.
    ODR is a tool to help parties in the dispute resolve their problem. There are various examples of ODR tool: supporting double blind bidding to determine a sum of money, working out divorce settlements, negotiating a solution and taking a case to court.
    Interesting research questions abound in the area of ODR and its users: What paths do people take when trying to resolve a problem? How can people have ownership of their court procedure? How can solutions, ODR and court procedures, best be tailored to the type of problem?
    ODR and its users is a field in which law and society researchers can effectively contribute to improving digital problem solving and dispute resolution procedures in court.


Dory Reiling
Dory Reiling is senior rechter in Amsterdam, en product owner van KEI Civiel. Ze promoveerde op “Technology for Justice, how IT can support judicial reform”. Ze blogt over IT en rechtspraak op mr-online en haar Technology for Justice-blog. Ze twittert op @doryontour, haar publicaties staan op www.doryreiling.com.
Praktijk

Aansprakelijkheidsverzekeringen: preventie door de verzekeraar en het effect op de bescherming van de verzekerde

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden Liability insurance, Prevention, Protection of the insured, Knowledge
Auteurs Charlotte Henskens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Liability insurances shift the financial risk of the loss of a damage from the person who is liable for the damage to the liability insurer. To avoid negligent behavior of the insured, the insurer provides different prevention tools in the insurance policy. The insurer will attach certain sanctions or rewards to certain behavior and certain circumstances in the general conditions of the insurance contract. This research raises the question of the effectiveness of these instruments. The hypothesis is that without knowledge of the insured of these sanctions or rewards, these sanctions and rewards will not form an additional incentive for careful behavior and they will have no preventive effect. Additionally, these prevention tools may undermine the protection of the insured. For this reason the legislature has limited the freedom of contract. This study examines the extent to which the legislature has limited the possibilities of the insurer to provide in prevention tools in de insurance policy. It assesses the extent to which the legislature may or may not succeed in its purpose to protect the insured, and on the other hand, where there are still possibilities for the insurer to fulfill its prevention task.


Charlotte Henskens
Charlotte Henskens behaalde haar diploma van master in de rechten in 2013 aan de Universiteit Antwerpen. Sinds 2013 werkt ze als doctoraatsbursaal aan de Universiteit Antwerpen onder promotorschap van Prof. Britt Weyts en Prof. Bernard Hubeau. Zij bereidt een multidisciplinair proefschrift voor over de preventie door de verzekeraar en de bescherming van de verzekerde in aansprakelijkheidsverzekeringen. Daarnaast is zij auteur van verschillende publicaties zowel in het aansprakelijkheids- en verzekeringsrecht als in de rechtssociologie.
Boekbespreking

De bestuurlijke boete gewogen

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden AFM, DNB, civil penalty, administratieve law, Review
Auteurs Wim Huisman
Auteursinformatie

Wim Huisman
Wim Huisman is hoogleraar criminologie aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Wim Huisman doet onderzoek naar regelovertreding binnen organisaties, alsmede de bestrijding daarvan.
Artikel

Huurachterstand, huisuitzetting en rechterlijke besluitvorming

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden Eviction, rent arrears, home interests, systematic content analysis
Auteurs Michel Vols en Nathalie Minkjan
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Recent developments in the field of housing law have led to a renewed interest in eviction and the legal protection against homelessness. Because of European case law, courts need to apply a contextual approach in which tenants’ home interests and personal circumstances are taken into account more seriously. This paper explores the ways in which home interests and personal circumstances play a role in Dutch litigation concerning eviction because of rent arrears. Based on a quantitative systematic content analysis of nearly 100 written judgments of courts of first instance, it is found that tenants frequently advance various types of proportionality defences and refer to home interests and personal circumstances. Although Dutch courts do take these defences, home interests and personal circumstances into account, the vast majority of landlords’ claims are allowed. In one third of the analysed cases, the court dismisses the landlord’s claim and most of the time minimises the breach of the lease or refers to the disproportional effects of eviction or a tenant’s promise to change his behaviour.


Michel Vols
Michel Vols is adjunct hoogleraar Openbare-orderecht aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en verbonden aan het Centrum voor Openbare Orde en Veiligheid. Hij doet onder meer onderzoek naar de bescherming van het recht op respect voor de woning en de aanpak van huisjesmelkerij en overlast. Hij is coördinator van de Housing Law Working Group binnen het European Network for Housing Research.

Nathalie Minkjan
Nathalie Minkjan is student aan de Togamaster en het Honours College aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Zij was tussen 2015 en 2016 als onderzoeksassistent verbonden aan het Centrum voor Openbare Orde en Veiligheid.

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.

    Self-regulation not always implies autonomy. Spontaneous self-regulation should be distinguished from commissioned self-regulation. The latter form of self-regulation is nowadays widespread and the result of outsourcing governmental activities. Outsourcing can be conceptualized in terms of Principal-Agent relations, in which the P commissions an A to realize P’s aims. In commissioned self-regulation the A is often constituted by the P and required to make rules in order to advance P’s aims. However, rule-making is not an activity which remains unaltered if it changes hands. In a context of spontaneous self-regulation rules fulfill a variety of functions. They guide actions and decision-making, they serve as both justification and as criticism of actions and decisions, and will thereby limit arbitrariness. In commissioned self-regulation, these manifold functions tend to be reduced to one dominant function: justifying performances towards P. In the latter capacity rules tend to be formalized and presented in a format that enables the P to arrive efficiently at a decision. Moreover, for the P the content of the rules matters less than their existence. The degree in which the external function of rules prevails determines not only how rules are presented but also how they are drafted and selected. The more A anticipates the perspective of P, the more autonomy risks to be undermined.


Pauline Westerman
Pauline Westerman is hoogleraar Rechtfilosofie aan de Faculteit Rechten van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en is tevens verbonden als staflid aan de Academie voor Wetgeving en Overheidsjuristen. Zij publiceerde in 2012 het boek Recht als Raadsel bij uitgeverij Paris, (nu tevens in het Zweeds vertaald) en bereidt momenteel een monografie voor die zal uitkomen bij Elgar Publishers onder de titel Outsourcing the law: a philosophy of regulation.
Artikel

Becker’s theory on crime and punishment, a useful guide for law enforcement policy in The Netherlands?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2016
Trefwoorden Economics of crime, law enforcement policy, Gary Becker
Auteurs Ben van Velthoven en Peter van Wijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Becker’s theory on crime and punishment provides guidelines for designing an optimal law enforcement policy. In designing such a policy the costs of law enforcement should be traded-off against the benefits that originate in deterring criminal acts. We investigate whether law enforcement policy in the Netherlands is consistent with this guidelines. Since policy makers are not very precise on the goals of law enforcement policy and hardly anything is known about the effectiveness and efficiency of instruments, it turns out to be impossible to say whether law enforcement policy actually contributes to social welfare. This is not necessarily problematic if, in line with the efficient law hypothesis, law enforcement automatically converges to an efficient outcome. Furthermore, Becker’s theory appears to miss a crucial element by not taking account of existing preferences for retribution. If utility is derived from seeing that justice is done, this should be included in the welfare criterion. Assuming policy makers prefer welfare enhancing law enforcement, they would be well-advised to start systematically collecting information on the effectiveness and efficiency of instruments of law enforcement policy.


Ben van Velthoven
Ben van Velthoven is universitair hoofddocent Rechtseconomie aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden.

Peter van Wijck
Peter van Wijck is universitair hoofddocent Rechtseconomie aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

Understanding judges’ choices of sentence types as interpretative work: An explorative study in a Dutch police court

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2016
Trefwoorden Judicial decision-making, sentencing type, (ir)redeemability, whole case approach
Auteurs Peter Mascini, Irene van Oorschot PhD, Assistant professor Don Weenink e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article critically evaluates the prevailing factor-oriented (e.g. a priori defined legal and extralegal characteristics of defendants) approach in analyses of judicial decision-making. Rather than assuming such factors, we aim to demonstrate how Dutch judges engage in interpretative work to arrive at various sentence types. In their interpretative work, judges attempt to weigh and compare various legal and extralegal features of defendants. Importantly, they do so in the context of the case as a whole, which means that these features do not have independent or fixed meanings. Judges select and weigh information to create an image of defendants’ redeemability. However, extralegal concerns other than redeemability also inform judges’ decisions. We argue that studying the naturally occurring interpretative work of judges results in a better understanding of judicial decision-making than outcome-oriented studies, which view criminal cases as collections of independent legal and extralegal factors.


Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini holds a chair in Empirical Legal Studies at the Erasmus School of Law of the Erasmus University Rotterdam, where he is also associate professor of sociology at the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences. His research focuses on the legitimization, implementation, and enforcement of laws and policies.

Irene van Oorschot PhD
Irene van Oorschot is a PhD candidate at the Faculty of the Social Sciences at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and will soon start as a postdoctoral researcher at the Anthropology Department of the University of Amsterdam. Drawing on actor network theory and feminist studies of knowledge, her research focuses on legal and scientific modes of truth-production.

Assistant professor Don Weenink
Don Weenink is assistant professor of Sociology at the Department of Sociology at the University of Amsterdam. He has published work on, among other subjects, ethnic inequalities in judicial sentencing.

Gratiëlla Schippers
Gratiëlla Schippers has studied Sociology at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. For her master thesis she has done research about the understanding of judges’ choices of sentence types.

Willem-Jan Kortleven
Willem-Jan Kortleven is als universitair docent verbonden aan de afdeling Bestuurswetenschap & Politicologie van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Hij publiceert over veiligheidsbeleid. In 2013 promoveerde hij aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam in de rechtssociologie op het proefschrift Voorzorg in Nederland.
Toont 1 - 20 van 22 gevonden teksten
« 1
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.