The COVID-19 pandemic caused overcrowded IC units. In the Netherlands a discussion erupted on what category of patients should be granted a bed, if there would not be enough place to treat everybody. In this article the medical guidelines for this situation as well as the public discussion are examined and related to Ulrich Beck’s theory of reflexive modernization. It is argued that discussion and regulation of this dilemma follow reflexive patterns, albeit patchy. The discussion and regulation displayed reflective understanding of the perilous position of the elderly and frail but issues of class and ethnicity were not discussed. This research revealed that Beck’s theory holds its own when tested in an empirical situation, but it has weaknesses in regard to the predicted emergence of cosmopolitan solidarity.

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.

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.

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.

High-impact incidents, such as (natural) disasters, severe (traffic) accidents, and exposure to (war) violence, may have severe psychological consequences, both for direct and indirect victims. Such consequences may qualify for financial compensation. However, some victims malinger their psychological status to get compensated for damages they have not suffered. This type of fraudulent behavior costs insurance companies and publicly funded compensation services enormous amounts of money and may eventually make compensation unaffordable. To prevent this from occurring, it is argued that lawyers who need to decide upon victims’ claims for compensation should call in independent experts to evaluate the genuineness of victims’ reported psychological symptoms by administrating a malingering detection test. To enable correct interpretation of the outcome of such a test, the base rate problem is extensively discussed. In short, this problem means that correct test interpretation in individual cases depends on the prevalence of malingering in the population to which a victim belongs. Finally, several counter arguments for the standard assessment of malingering by independent experts are discussed.

During the recent Senate debate about the constitutional state some senators expressed a concern about the tensions between the legislature and judiciary. The problems of overburdening, underfunding and instrumentalisation of the judiciary have a long history. The legislature has a tendency to overburden himself and the other powers of state, like the judiciary, notwithstanding the official policy to be reserved with regard to the responsibilities of government. The judiciary must adapt itself to an ever more prominent role in the constitutional state. The judiciary also has to generate its own legitimacy and cannot consider this to be a function of the legitimacy basis of the democratic legislator. The legislator for his part has all kinds of democratic wishes and expectations on how the judiciary can increase its own legitimacy basis by dealing quicker with more cases. In this context, the minister strongly adheres to the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied. The working methods of the judiciary have shown small and gradual steps in the direction of a more responsive and communicative procedure. However, the judiciary is not able to transform all its ideas into concrete initiatives and to transform successful initiatives into settled practices.

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).

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.

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.