Zoekresultaat: 29 artikelen

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

De beslispraktijk van het Schadefonds Geweldsmisdrijven: een kwalitatieve studie naar de beoordeling van verzoeken tot tegemoetkoming

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden slachtoffers, geweldscriminaliteit, schade, tegemoetkoming, beslispraktijk
Auteurs Mara Huibers MSc., Prof. dr. mr. Maarten Kunst en Dr. mr. Sigrid van Wingerden
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Victims who suffer severe damages due to the act of a violent crime can request state compensation from the Dutch Violent Offences Compensation Fund (VOCF). VOCF workers who decide on these requests use their discretionary powers to translate the VOCF’s rules and policy into concrete actions. This study investigated (1) to what extent these VOCF workers match Lipsky’s definition of street-level bureaucrats and (2) what routines and heuristics they use to deal with time and information constraints. On the basis of document analysis and interviews, we found that the decision makers of the VOCF can to a certain extent be seen as street-level bureaucrats. To make decisions timely, some of them use routines such as the ‘downstream orientation’. This means that they award requests for compensation if they think that the applicant would be able to successfully contest a rejecting decision. To deal with a lack of information, they sometimes include a review clause in the text of a rejection decision. The use of heuristics was not found among the lawyers who decide in first instance, but in case of appeal hearings heuristics such as the affect and representativeness heuristic seem to play a role in the decision-making process. Future research should investigate whether these routines and heuristics lead to disparities in outcomes.


Mara Huibers MSc.
Mara Huibers is docent Criminologie aan de Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. mr. Maarten Kunst
Maarten Kunst is hoogleraar criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Dr. mr. Sigrid van Wingerden
Sigrid van Wingerden is universitair hoofddocent criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. Frans Leeuw
Frans Leeuw is directeur van het WODC en Professor Law, Public Policy and Social Science Research aan de Universiteit van Maastricht.
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.
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

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.
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.
Artikel

Challenges and obstacles to access to justice in health care

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden patients’ rights, disciplinary law, medical negligence, right to complain
Auteurs Aart Hendriks
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, patients have a large number of options to express their dissatisfaction about the services provided by health care providers and can institute all kind of (quasi) legal procedures. None of these procedures was however introduced to ensure patients’ right to access to justice. Access to justice for health care providers confronted with complaints by patients is even less guaranteed. An analysis of Dutch law and practice learns that the access to justice has not found an inroad in the health care sector yet. This is not to suggest that patients lack legal rights, but if access to justice was taken as a yardstick to measures laws against the health care sector, they would have looked differently.


Aart Hendriks
Aart Hendriks is Professor in Health Law at Leiden University, the Netherlands, legal advisor to the Royal Dutch Medical Association, and substitute judge at the District Court of Rotterdam. He has published extensively on health and human rights issues. He serves as advisor to various national and international organizations, is board member of a number of administrative bodies, and is editor of several scientific journals in the field of health, medicine, and human rights.
Artikel

Tenant vs. owner: deriving access to justice from the right to housing

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden tenants’ rights, adequate housing, discrimination, effectiveness of law
Auteurs Nico Moons
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The right to adequate housing has since long been established in international and European human rights law and has been (constitutionally) incorporated into many domestic legal systems. This contribution focuses on the extent to which this fundamental right influences rental law and the horizontal relationship between tenant and landlord and how it contributes to the tenant’s access to justice. The right to housing certainly accounts for tenant’s rights, but since international and European human rights law evidently centres around state obligations, any possible impact on the position of tenants remains indirect. This is of course different on the national plane. In Belgium, the constitutional right to housing has been implemented through regional Housing Codes, complementing private law measures and creating additional protection to tenants. Nonetheless, many challenges still remain in increasing access to justice for tenants, both top-down and bottom-up: lack of knowledge and complexity of law, imbalance in power and dependency, discrimination, etc.


Nico Moons
Nico Moons is a PhD student at the Faculty of Law of the University of Antwerp (research group Government & Law). His research topic involves the effectiveness of the right to adequate housing. Previously, he has worked at the Council for Alien Law Litigation.
Artikel

Wetgeving, empirisch-juridisch onderzoek en Legal Big Data

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2015
Trefwoorden legislation, big data, empirical legal research, nudging
Auteurs Frans L. Leeuw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A second empirical revolution in law is in full swing: legal big data have made their entrance and will play an increasingly important role in the legal field. Legal big data, for example, increase the accessibility and transparency of files. They make it easier for legislators to find out how society views proposed legislation. Using big data, all jurisprudence can be processed very easily and judicial decisions can be predicted with a high degree of certainty. The contribution concludes with a number of legal and ethical issues and methodological challenges in relation to legal big data, such as ownership, privacy and representativeness.


Frans L. Leeuw
Frans L. Leeuw is directeur van het Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum (WODC) bij het ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie. Tevens is hij hoogleraar Recht, openbaar bestuur en sociaalwetenschappelijk onderzoek aan de universiteit van Maastricht. Eerder was hij onder meer directeur Doelmatigheidsonderzoek bij de Algemene Rekenkamer. Hij publiceerde vele artikelen en boeken, vooral op het terrein van evaluatie.

    In the course of it short existence, Socio-legal studies (SLS) in the Anglo-Saxon world has burgeoned into a rich and variegated field. Reviewing it is therefore a challenging task. I begin with some general reflections and an outline of recent developments. Although these indicate an extremely vibrant field, concerns have been expressed for the future. In my discussion of these, I argue that our analysis of SLS needs to be historicised since the emergence of SLS is connected to processes of social modernization and democratization. The erosion of these processes by neo-liberal discourses and policies is the background to a discussion of my own research into the impact of the cuts to civil legal aid in England and Wales. This leads me to conclude that the fundamental dissonance between neo-liberal rationality and social science may portend a difficult future, in particular for empirical work; however, I note too that other developments such as the ongoing juridification of society and new social media may make continued SL engagement irresistible.


Hilary Sommerlad
Hilary Sommerlad is professor of Law and Research Director of the Centre for Professional Legal Education and Research, University of Birmingham, and Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences. Dr. Sommerlad’s research interests are access to justice, the cultural practices of the professional workplace and diversity. She is Articles Editor of Legal Ethics, and serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Law and Society and the International Journal of the Legal Profession.
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).

Richard Staring
Richard Staring is endowed professor of criminology at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. He has published on irregular migration, human smuggling as well as human trafficking.
Boekbespreking

Preventie of paranoia?

Een parodie op het ‘voorzorgsdenken’

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2014
Auteurs Jan Popma
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this feature authors review recently published books on subjects of interest to readers of Recht der Werkelijkheid.


Jan Popma
Jan Popma studeerde sociologie en wijsbegeerte aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, en is thans senior onderzoeker arbeidsomstandighedenwetgeving aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Daarnaast is hij coördinerend docent van de minor Arbeid, Risico en Regulering. Onderdeel van de minor is onder meer het vak Nieuwe risico’s en regulering, dat gaat over de vraag wat de betekenis is van het voorzorgsbeginsel in het arbeidsrecht. Popma publiceerde ook onderzoek over de risico’s van onder meer mobiele telefoons (2009), nanomaterialen (2010) en technostress (2012).
Artikel

Loyaliteit binnen de rechterlijke macht

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden judiciary, loyalty, judges, new public management, socialisation
Auteurs Nina Holvast en Nienke Doornbos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Judges in the Netherlands have recently expressed their concerns in the media over the organization of the judiciary and the pressure to deliver output. At the same time, they consider themselves highly loyal to their work. In this article we explore this seeming contradiction by studying the developments in the selection, training and organisation of the judiciary and considering the consequences that these developments could have on the loyalty of judges. In doing so, a distinction is made between loyalty to the profession, to the organisation and to colleagues. We follow Hirschman's theory on Exit, Voice and Loyalty and determine that the act of judges expressing their concerns (instead of exiting the judiciary) is essentially a sign of their loyalty. However, we reason that this displays more loyalty to the profession than to the organisation. Due to changes in the selection and training of judges, more candidates who were formerly employed in other settings, e.g. in advocacy, will enter the profession. With their socialisation taking place in a more business-like setting, where values such as efficiency and productivity are significant, it is expected that they will be more willing to accept the new public management values which are criticized by the present generation of judges.


Nina Holvast
Nina Holvast is promovenda bij het Paul Scholten Centrum van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zij schrijft een rechtssociologisch proefschrift naar de rol van juridische ondersteuning in het rechterlijk besluitvormingsproces. Over dit onderwerp verschijnt binnenkort: ‘Considering the consequences of increased reliance on judicial assistants: a study on Dutch courts’ in International Journal of the Legal Profession.

Nienke Doornbos
Nienke Doornbos is universitair docent en onderzoeker bij de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zij doceert de minor Rechtswetenschappelijk onderzoek en het vak Recht en menselijk gedrag. Haar onderzoek richt zich onder meer op organisatorische kanten van rechterlijke besluitvorming en op toezicht en tuchtrecht binnen de advocatuur.
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

Henry Stimson en het Neurenberg Tribunaal

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden Nuremberg Tribunal, international criminal law, Morgenthau plan, summary execution of war criminals
Auteurs Alex Jettinghoff
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    When the Allied victory over the Axis powers is becoming certain, American officials start making plans for the occupation of Germany. In the aftermath of the invasion in 1944, some of these plans are brought to the attention of the Secretary of the Treasury in Roosevelt’s war cabinet, Henry Morgenthau. These plans infuriate him, because he considers them too lenient on Germany, which in his opinion should be reduced to an agrarian economy after its Nazi leadership has been summarily executed. The President at first agrees with this line of action as do most of the members of his cabinet. The only one opposing these ideas is the Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, suggesting economic reconstruction and an international tribunal instead. His opposition seems in vain, when Roosevelt and Churchill publicly agree to this course of action towards Germany during a meeting in Quebec. But the ‘Morgenthau plan’ unravels when it is leaked to the press and it causes an uproar. Roosevelt fears for his re-election chances and hastily retreats. But he makes no decision on the issue and Stimson has to wait for his opportunity. It comes in the person of a new President: Harry Truman. He agrees to Stimson’s proposal for an international tribunal and this brings the United States on board of an allied majority for what is later to become the Nuremberg Tribunal.


Alex Jettinghoff
Alex Jettinghoff is als fellow verbonden aan het Instituut voor Rechtssociologie van de Rechtenfaculteit van Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Hij schreef recentelijk over het procederen van bedrijven, rechterlijke specialisatie en de wording van het Unified Patent System van de Europese Unie.
Artikel

Raphael Lemkin en de misdaad zonder naam

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden Genocide Convention, human rights, public international law, United Nations, international tribunals, jurisdiction, campaigning
Auteurs Reyer Baas
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Could one imagine that up until the mid-1940s international treaties had been ratified on postal services, copyright protection, and whale hunting, but not on genocide? It was only after the Second World War that the deliberate and systematic destruction of groups was recognised as an international crime. There had not even been a name for this practice, which has existed since the beginning of humanity. The 1948 Genocide Convention, the first human rights treaty adopted by the United Nations, was a milestone in the international protection of human rights, although several tragedies have shown that mere law is not sufficient to relegate genocide to the scrapheap of history. The initiator of the Convention was not a very well-known man. This article is about the struggle of Raphael Lemkin, who had, with unflagging zeal, devoted his life to the elimination of genocide.


Reyer Baas
Reyer Baas is promovendus Rechtspleging aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen en bereidt een proefschrift voor over rechterlijke besluitvorming. Tevens is hij docent Algemene rechtswetenschap. Hij publiceerde onder andere: R. Baas e.a., Rechtspraak: samen of alleen, Den Haag: Raad voor de rechtspraak 2010.
Toont 1 - 20 van 29 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.