Zoekresultaat: 30 artikelen

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

Access_open Coronacrisis en rechtspleging

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Corona crisis, judiciary, ICT, Court delay, Trias politica
Auteurs Dr. Frans van Dijk en Mr. dr. Eddy Bauw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Four phases of the Corona crisis are distinguished: a first acute phase, the gradual transition to a new normal, the economic downturn and the long run. The article describes what happened in the courts in the first and in the beginning of the second phase, and what is subsequently likely to happen. In the acute phase the court buildings shut down, and adjudication came largely to a halt. The courts were late in opening up, and as a result backlogs of, in particular, criminal cases increased. The courts extended their use of digital tools (e.g. tele-hearings) that, while allowing cases to proceed, did not fully protect the rights of parties. While so far the volume of commercial cases and bankruptcies has not increased, a (rapid) increase is inevitable. Contract breach will be wide spread, and will give rise to fundamental legal issues. For economic recovery it is essential that the courts give clear and consistent guidance in these matters quickly. This requires the courts to reduce the currently long duration of civil cases, and to use the available procedures to get expeditious decisions of the Supreme Court. The courts will also need to develop their ICT-instruments rapidly to guarantee the rights of parties. After a difficult first phase, the courts now face the challenge to effectively guide society through the Corona crisis and its aftermath, and thereby play its role in the trias politica.


Dr. Frans van Dijk
Frans van Dijk is professor Empirische analyse van rechtssystemen, Montaigne Centrum voor rechtsstaat en rechtspleging, Universiteit Utrecht en adviseur van de Raad voor de rechtspraak. Zijn huidige onderzoek gaat over percepties van rechterlijke onafhankelijkheid, fouten in rechterlijke besluitvorming en de rol van de rechtspraak in de economie. Hij heeft enquêtes onder rechters en advocaten georganiseerd voor het Europees Netwerk van Raden voor de rechtspraak.

Mr. dr. Eddy Bauw
Eddy Bauw is hoogleraar Privaatrecht en rechtspleging. Voorzitter van het Molengraaff Instituut voor Privaatrecht en programmaleider van het Montaigne Centrum voor rechtsstaat en rechtspleging. Raadsheer-plaatsvervanger gerechtshof Den Haag. Zijn recente onderzoek richt zich op de thema’s collectieve actie, massaschade, rechtspleging en conflictoplossing.
Artikel

Het werk van Wibo van Rossum – een bloemlezing

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Wibo van Rossum, Legal anthropology, Administration of Justice, Empirical research, The Netherlands
Auteurs Dr. mr. Marc Simon Thomas en Prof. mr. Rick Verschoof
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article is about the work of Wibo van Rossum who passed away in April 2018. Trained as a legal anthropologist he has conducted empirical research on the administration of justice in the Netherlands for many years. This anthology is about four research reports he produced and many articles he has written in two decades. This article provides an academic as well as a practical review of his work.


Dr. mr. Marc Simon Thomas
Marc Simon Thomas is universitair docent aan de Universiteit Utrecht.

Prof. mr. Rick Verschoof
Rick Verschoof is senior rechter en bijzonder hoogleraar rechtspraak aan de Universiteit Utrecht.

Richard Abel
Rick Abel is Connell Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and Distinguished Research Professor at University of California Los Angeles (UCLA). 'John and I, we both began our academic careers at Yale in the late 1960s, were alienated by the institution (social pretensions and intellectual narrowness) and happily found other homes: John in the Netherlands and I in California. I left Yale as an Associate Professor. At UCLA I am Connell Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and Distinguished Research Professor.'
Artikel

The effective public enforcement of cartels: perceptions on the functioning of the objection procedure and the reality

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden Dispute resolution, Objection procedure, Cartel enforcement, Administrative law, Stakeholder interviews
Auteurs Mr. Annalies Outhuijse LLM
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Companies fined for infringing the cartel prohibition are denied access to the courts until the competition authority has reviewed its fining decision in the objection procedure. Several stakeholders have been negative about the functioning of this objection procedure in case of cartel fines, including because of its limited ability to resolve disputes and the cost and length of the procedure. In light of the discussions on the effectiveness of this objection procedure, this article analyses the ability of the cartel objection procedure to resolve disputes on basis of an analysis of the decisions on objection, as well as interviews with the parties involved in the objection procedure and a study of relevant literature. Previous studies have shown that the success of the objection procedure, regarding dispute resolution, depends on the nature of the dispute, the reason that the objection is made and the organisation of the procedure. Reviewing the data which was gathered through the interviews and case analysis with the knowledge of these factors influencing the success of the objection procedure, the article concludes that these previously carried out studies can explain the limited ability of the cartel objection procedure to resolve disputes.


Mr. Annalies Outhuijse LLM
Annalies Outhuijse is PhD fellow at the Department of Administrative Law at the University of Groningen.

Dr. Andreas Hofmann
Andreas Hofmann is a post-doctoral researcher at Freie Universität Berlin. He has held previous positions as lecturer at the University of Cologne and post-doctoral fellow at the Centre for European Research (CERGU), University of Gothenburg.
Artikel

Hoger beroep in het bestuursrecht: massaal gebruik, ontevreden gebruikers

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Satisfaction, Appeals procedure, Administrative law
Auteurs Professor Bert Marseille, Dr. Barbara Brink en Mr. dr. Martje Boekema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In administrative law, a substantial number of citizens who are dissatisfied with government decisions go on to appeal their decision at a higher court. This article discusses how satisfied those appellants are about the procedure and the result.
    The data presented demonstrate a substantial difference in appreciation of the procedure between winners and losers. In addition, many appellants experience a very low degree of distributive justice. In part, people show a fundamental distrust in the administration of justice, but for a greater part, people argue that the higher court judge has not assessed their case in an expert or fair way.
    The most intriguing outcomes of the analysis concern the large majority, including both winners and losers, that claim that the verdict did not end the conflict with the counterparty. Additionally, almost everyone argues that they would file an appeal again, if presented with that possibility. The experienced dissatisfaction, skepticism and frustration regarding the procedure seem to have little or no influence on the willingness to return to the administrative higher court in the future.


Professor Bert Marseille
Bert Marseille is hoogleraar bestuurskunde, in het bijzonder de empirische bestudering van het bestuursrecht, bij de vakgroep Staatsrecht, Bestuursrecht en Bestuurskunde van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

Dr. Barbara Brink
Barbara Brink is docent bij de vakgroep Staatsrecht, Bestuursrecht en Bestuurskunde van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en coördineert de master Juridische bestuurskunde.

Mr. dr. Martje Boekema
Martje Boekema is universitair docent Staats- en Bestuursrecht bij de Universiteit Utrecht. Haar onderzoek richt zich op de (bestuurs)rechtspraak en geschilbeslechting.
Artikel

Voorbij procedurele rechtvaardigheid

De betrekkelijkheid van de beleving van respondenten

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Procedural Justice, Administrative law, Access to Justice, Outcomes of legal proceedings
Auteurs Dr. Nienke Doornbos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    To overcome problems of juridification and formalization of administrative law, successful initiatives have been undertaken by professionals in the public administration and judiciary to improve administrative procedures. These initiatives have been inspired by theories of (perceived) procedural justice, as developed by Tyler and Lind (1988). Although the author acknowledges the importance of procedural justice, she argues that the strong focus on procedural aspects, based on subjective opinions of claimants, may unintentionally lead to a situation in which other important issues may be easily overlooked, such as the question why citizens would refrain from starting a lawsuit or the question what explains the low success rates of citizens in administrative law.


Dr. Nienke Doornbos
Nienke Doornbos is universitair docent bij de Afdeling Algemene rechtsleer van de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
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

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.
Artikel

Social security and social welfare: barriers and retrograde policies, but cause for optimism?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden social security, legal representation, means-testing, Britain, fees
Auteurs Amir Paz-Fuchs
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution addresses the limits placed on access to justice in the context of social services, with a particular, but not exclusive, focus on the UK, across five central platforms: legal representation, the financial barriers, the structure of the programme, the attitude of the bureaucracy, and the personal attributes of the client. The contribution finds that there exist, for decades, problematic elements that constitute barriers to justice in this area: the means-tested element in the programmes and the bureaucracy’s double role as provider of services and detector of fraud. But to them, in recent years, significant barriers were added: recent cuts in legal aid and the imposition of tribunal fees in the UK are retrograde steps, reverting 40 years of impressive achievements in the field.


Amir Paz-Fuchs
Amir Paz-Fuchs (D. Phil Oxford) is a Senior Lecturer at the School of Law, University of Sussex, where he teaches employment law, public law, and legal theory. In addition, he is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies and a Research Associate at Wolfson College, both at the University of Oxford. He is also Co-Director of the ‘The Limits of Privatization’ research project, based at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem. He also served on the board of several human rights and social justice NGOs.
Artikel

Responsibilities of the state and legal professions

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden responsibilities, the state, lawyers, the judiciary and judges
Auteurs Mies Westerveld en Ashley Terlouw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution, which is based on the Dutch legal system, deals with the responsibilities of the State and legal professions in ensuring access to justice. The responsibilities of the four main players involved in bringing justice to the citizen are discussed: the legislator, the executive, the judiciary, and the legal profession. Responsibilities for access to justice do not only stem from the law, they do also evolve from societal problems and discussions. The contribution deals with both. Several actors share some of the responsibilities. One can think of responsibilities for information, for financing, and for being aware of vulnerabilities and other obstacles. What are the legal responsibilities and what other responsibilities are felt by the actors involved and how do they deal with them? And as a result: do they contribute to access to justice, do they form an obstacle, or both?


Mies Westerveld
Mies Westerveld is Professor Legal aid by special appointment and Professor in Labour Law (social insurance) at the University of Amsterdam. Her research concentrates on current issues of access to justice and state-financed legal aid on the one hand and the decreasing role of social insurance on a fragmented labour market on the other hand.

Ashley Terlouw
Ashley Terlouw is Professor in Sociology of Law at the Radboud University of Nijmegen. She is responsible for the Centre for Migration Law of the Radboud University. Besides she is part-time Judge at the District Court of Gelderland. Her research concentrates on legal and societal issues of asylum and equal treatment and on the working of the judiciary.
Diversen

Sociology of law in European civil law countries

Some remarks and correspondent proposals

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden socio-legal studies, high theory, research, achievements and gaps
Auteurs Vincenzo Ferrari
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In continental Europe, post-war sociology of law passed through diverse phases, swinging between grand theorizing and empirical research. In the last two decades, socio-legal studies have shown a more balanced approach with respect to these models. Neo-functionalism à-la Luhmann still takes the lead in high theory, although some more eclectic voices make themselves heard and some signs of renaissance of conflict theories have become visible again. Through an overview of the recent editorial policy of three influential journals in France, Germany and Italy, the author highlights that middle range socio-legal theory has successfully dealt with some relevant aspects of legal change of the last decades, in such fields as criminal justice, migrations, or family law. Yet, it has left aside other and no less important aspects, such as commerce and property laws, common goods, environment, and other crucial questions of our times. Thus, there is a risk for sociology of law not to perform its critical and pioneering task that belongs to its own tradition.


Vincenzo Ferrari
Vincenzo Ferrari is emeritus professor of philosophy and sociology of law. He has taught in the Universities of Cagliari, Bologna and Milan, and has been a visiting professor in diverse world’s academic institutions. He chaired the ISA Research Committee on Sociology of Law and was among the founders of the IISL, Oñati.
Artikel

National variations in the implementation and enforcement of European food hygiene regulations

Comparing the structure of food controls and regulations between Scotland and the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden food regulation, official controls, EU food law, implementation, enforcement
Auteurs Tetty Havinga
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the course of time the European Union has increased its powers considerably. Currently, almost all food safety regulations in the member states rest on European law. Despite this common legal base, several differences between member states still exist. This article compares the way Scottish and Dutch authorities deal with a particular item of European food law: the development of national guides to good practice for hygiene and for the application of HACCP principles by the food industry. The results of this investigation are consistent with the conclusion of Falkner et al. that the implementation of EU law in both the Netherlands and the UK depends on domestic issues. The dominant issue in Scotland (and the UK) is the FSA objective to bring consistent food controls and independency from industry which results in the development of governmental guidance. The prevailing issue in the Netherlands is making industry responsible for food safety which helps explain the extensive use of industry guides. This study shows that in order to understand what happens on the ground it is important to look beyond transposition or direct effect and also to investigate the implementation of regulations and to dig deeper than just their transposition.


Tetty Havinga
Tetty Havinga is Associate Professor at the Institute for the Sociology of Law, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands. She has published on the regulation of food safety, policy implementation and law enforcement, equal opportunities law, asylum migration and migrant workers. Her recent research projects deal with the development and effects of private regulation of food safety, oversight and official controls in the food industry, and the experiences of large companies with Dutch special courts. She is co-editor of The Changing Landscape of Food Governance (to be published by Edward Elgar, 2015).
Artikel

De afstand tussen burger en rechter

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Confidence in the judiciary, punitivity gap, accessibility gap
Auteurs Marijke Malsch
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The distance between the public and the judiciary takes two forms: a punitivity gap and an accessibility gap. This article discusses both types of gap and elaborates on the issue of whether the existence of these gaps influences confidence in the judiciary. From the literature, it appears that the public is generally of the opinion that courts sentence too leniently. However, experiments show that when citizens receive information on a specific case, they become less punitive. Information provision may also help to bridge an accessibility gap, as does actual citizen involvement in the administration of justice. The relation between the gaps discussed and confidence in the judiciary is not clear as yet. The article discusses methods generally used to assess confidence and suggests that confidence may be increased by a reduction of the two gaps.


Marijke Malsch
Marijke Malsch is senior onderzoeker bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving (NSCR) te Amsterdam, en rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Haarlem en het Hof Den Bosch. Bij de Vrije Universiteit (VU) verzorgt zij het vak ‘Recht en Praktijk’. Enkele publicaties: ‘De aanvaarding en naleving van rechtsnormen door burgers: participatie, informatieverschaffing en bejegening’, in: P.T. de Beer & C.J.M. Schuyt (red.), Bijdragen aan waarden en normen, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2004, p. 77-106. En: Democracy in the courts. Lay participation in European criminal justice systems, Aldershot: Ashgate 2009.
Artikel

Vertrouwen en wantrouwen in de Belgische justitie en de rol van de krantenberichtgeving

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Trust in justice system, Belgium, reporting of newspapers
Auteurs Stien Mercelis
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this contribution it has been set out that trust in the Belgian justice system cannot be taken for granted. The article contains empirical research on the reporting of newspapers on the Belgian justice system and tries to uncover a possible causal relationship between reading certain newspapers and trust in the justice system. Although it turns out that quality newspapers report on the justice system in a more negative way, readers of popular papers have less trust in the justice system. A direct link between negative reporting and reduced trust was therefore not found. Socio-economic variables and the priming effect on punitive attitudes in popular newspapers are cited as possible explanations.


Stien Mercelis
Stien Mercelis is master in de Rechten en bachelor in de Criminologie. Momenteel is zij assistente Rechtssociologie aan de Universiteit Antwerpen. Zij schrijft een proefschrift over de interne en externe factoren van het vertrouwen in de Belgische justitie als openbare dienst.
Artikel

Transparantie leidt niet vanzelfsprekend tot vertrouwen in de rechtspraak

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Transparency, information, factors influencing confidence in the judiciary
Auteurs Petra Jonkers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Transparency of institutions like the judiciary is often assumed to increase confidence. However, a recent survey concerning opinions about the judiciary showed that in many cases one trusts the judiciary without having any special interest in the judiciary itself. It revealed that confidence in the judiciary depends on various factors like anomy, social trust, general institutional trust, personal experience and feelings about a fair chance in a hypothetical case for court. And transparency will not easily change these factors. Furthermore, providing information can both strengthen and weaken confidence due to the personal backgrounds of those receiving the information. Finally, this paper discusses whether strategic and positive information that is needed to increase confidence allows for drawing one’s own conclusions as transparency promises.


Petra Jonkers
Petra Jonkers is politicoloog en stafmedewerker bij de Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid. Zij promoveerde in 2003 in Nijmegen op een rechtssociologisch onderzoek naar de kwaliteit van wetgeving. Recente publicaties: ‘Inzicht in gedrag voorwaarde voor goede wetgeving’, Regelmaat 2013-28(1), p. 6-21; ‘Zet transparantie liever in voor bekritiseerbaarheid dan voor vertrouwen’, in: D. Broeders, C. Prins, H. Griffioen, P. Jonkers, M. Bokhorst & M. Sax (red.), Speelruimte voor transparantere rechtspraak, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2013, p. 449-479.
Artikel

Geen woorden maar daden

De invloed van legitimiteit en vertrouwen op het nalevingsgedrag van verkeersovertreders

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden perceptions of legitimacy, Compliance, procedural justice
Auteurs Marc Hertogh, Bert Schudde en Heinrich Winter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    For many years, most regulatory research focused on instrumental motivations for compliance, which emphasize the role of rewards and punishments related to (dis)obeying the law. However, more recent studies have also emphasized the potential role of normative motivations. Using survey data collected from a sample of 1,182 traffic offenders in the Netherlands, and building on the ‘procedural justice model’ which was first developed in Why People Obey the Law (Tyler 1990), this paper explores how perceptions of legitimacy shape regulatory compliance. The study makes three contributions to the literature. First, this study is one of the few studies in which the procedural justice model is tested in Continental Europe. Second, following recent critiques in the literature, the paper introduces three modifications to the original model. Third, and unlike most previous studies, this study is not entirely based on self-reporting by drivers, but includes actual evidence about their behavior as well. With regard to the self-reported level of compliance, our study largely confirms Tyler’s (1990) original findings. Yet with regard to the observed level of compliance, there are also important differences between both studies. These findings will be explained by shifting our focus of attention from Tyler’s ‘universalistic’ approach to ‘legitimacy-in-context’ (Beetham 1991).


Marc Hertogh
Marc Hertogh is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Centrale thema’s in zijn onderzoek zijn de maatschappelijke effecten van wetgeving, de maatschappelijke beleving van recht en rechtsstaat, en de legitimiteit van het overheidsoptreden. Recente publicaties: Scheidende machten: de relatiecrisis tussen politiek en rechtspraak (Boom Juridische uitgevers 2012) en (met Heleen Weyers) Recht van onderop: antwoorden uit de rechtssociologie (Ars Aequi Libri 2011).

Bert Schudde
Bert Schudde studeerde sociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en is werkzaam als onderzoeker bij Pro Facto. Hij heeft brede onderzoekservaring in toegepast beleids- en evaluatieonderzoek, grootschalig surveyonderzoek en kwantitatieve analyse.

Heinrich Winter
Heinrich Winter is directeur van Pro Facto, bureau voor bestuurskundig en juridisch onderzoek, onderwijs en advies. Daarnaast is hij in Groningen bijzonder hoogleraar Toezicht. Hij is veelvuldig betrokken bij wetsevaluaties, waarover hij ook publiceert. Recente publicaties over toezicht zijn ‘Waar blijft het interbestuurlijk toezicht?’, in: Publicaties van de Staatsrechtkring nr. 16 (Wolf Legal Publishers 2012) en ‘Meten van de effecten van toezicht. Yes we can?’, Tijdschrift voor Toezicht 2012/2, p. 63-80. In 2013 schreef hij met Bert Marseille de handleiding Professioneel behandelen van bezwaarschriften voor BZK/Prettig contact met de overheid.
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.
Toont 1 - 20 van 30 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.