Zoekresultaat: 5 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht x
Artikel

Access_open Sanctionering van verkeersongevallen

Op het kruispunt van taakstraffen, verkeersdelicten en herstelrecht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 3 2019
Trefwoorden Verkeersongevallen, Verkeersdelicten, taakstraf, Wegenverkeerswet
Auteurs Jacques Claessen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution seeks to bring together three themes in a descriptive and exploratory manner: (a) community service orders, (b) traffic offences and (c) restorative justice; the Dutch situation is central. To this end, the Dutch legal regulation regarding community service orders is first explained. Attention is also paid to existing empirical research on the effectiveness of community service orders in terms of reduction of recidivism (section 2). Furthermore, the sanctioning of traffic offences is discussed as well as the consequences for this of the current bill that seeks to sharpen criminal liability for serious traffic offences (section 3). Subsequently, it is examined which restorative justice provisions or modalities are available and how restorative community service orders are and can be designed (section 4). Finally, I describe my ideal when it comes to the sanctioning of traffic offences in the form of a continuum in which a special role is reserved for restorative community service orders (section 5). The contribution ends with a conclusion (section 6).


Jacques Claessen
Jacques Claessen is als bijzonder hoogleraar herstelrecht en universitair hoofddocent straf- en strafprocesrecht verbonden aan de vakgroep Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Maastricht. Hij is daarnaast rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Limburg en bestuurslid van Stichting Mens en Strafrecht. Hij is redactielid van dit tijdschrift.
Artikel

Advocatuur in strafrecht en herstelrecht

Een verkenning van de verschillen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden raadsman, herstelprocesrecht, Strafprocesrecht, advocaten, mediation
Auteurs John Blad
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The author first describes the deontological axioma for the role of the defense counsel in the domain of criminal procedure. Since here the most serious charges are brought against a suspect, who may have all his life-perspectives to lose by severe punishments, the duty of the legal counsel is to be as one-sided in the defense of his clients views and interests as possible and as allowed by professional ethics. He is the guardian of the legitimate interests of the suspect in the context of a legal battle in or out of court about the legal truth of what is said to have happened. In view of the ideals of restorative justice (illustrated by references to Nils Christies Conflicts as property) a new set of rules and customs should be developed that can function as a framework of ‘restorative procedural law’. In the context of restorative justice legal counsel of both the suspect and the victim should be expected and able to function much more as ‘restorative coaches’, seeking co-operation and deliberation between all stakeholders. But, should clients – suspects and victims alike – decide against such an approach and want ‘their day in court’ this should also be possible and be realised. The independent courts should always remain the ultimate refuge for those seeking justice.


John Blad
John Blad is redacteur van dit tijdschrift, auteur en consulent op het gebied van herstelrecht. Naast andere publicaties schreef hij samen met David Cornwell en Martin Wright Civilising Criminal Justice, Waterside Press (2013). In 2015 viel hem de Herman Bianchi herstelrecht-prijs ten deel.

Jacques Claessen
Jacques Claessen is als universitair docent straf(proces)recht verbonden aan de vakgroep Strafrecht & Criminologie, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Universiteit Maastricht. In 2010 verscheen zijn dissertatie Misdaad en straf. Een herbezinning op het strafrecht vanuit mystiek perspectief (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers). Zijn interessegebieden zijn sanctierecht, herstelrecht en de strafrechtelijke positie van het slachtoffer. Claessen is redacteur van de Nieuwsbrief Strafrecht en het Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht. Voorts is hij rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Limburg. Hij is winnaar van de Bianchi Herstelrechtprijs 2012.

Bas van Stokkom
Bas van Stokkom is verbonden aan de vaksectie Strafrecht & Criminologie, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Hij verricht onderzoek op het grensvlak van ethiek, criminologie en de sociale wetenschappen. Tot de thema’s die in zijn onderzoek aan bod komen, behoren politie, burgerschap en lokale veiligheidszorg, sanctietheorieën en herstelrecht. www.basvanstokkom.nl.
Discussie

Victimalisering van het strafproces

Een herstelrechtelijk commentaar

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden slachtofferrechten, procespartij, strafproces, herstelrecht
Auteurs John Blad
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The author discusses the proposals done by Richard Korver, a Dutch victim-solicitor, with regard to the legal position of the victim in the Dutch penal procedure. They amount to making the victim a fully equipped party to the procedure with – as it were – the same arms as the offender and his solicitor has. These proposals include an autonomous right to appeal against the verdict in first instance, a right to make a victim statement of opinion, the right to rebuke the bench, and the right to be heard in almost every procedural and substantial decision of any authority in the penal process and in the execution of punishment. The authors comment is that these proposals, when realized, will imply an intensification of the polarized legal debate in the penal procedure, with more risks of secondary victimization. The problem is not that the defendant will oppose two prosecutors, but that the victim will find the public prosecutor not on his side when the latter does his job as he should: serving the interests of justice. The inquisitorial procedure does allow for participation of victims, but only in so far as this participation can serve the interests of establishing the truth of the matter and determining proportionate and equal punishment. Meanwhile the risk of instrumentalising the victim and his needs in interests in punitive strategies exists. Restorative practices offer a much better context for an assertive victim to defend his interests and satisfy his needs, staying out of a debate in which the measure of punishment functions as the yardstick of his suffering. Regular civil law procedures could be the second option and criminal procedures should be relegated again to their rightful place as ultima ratio.


John Blad
John Blad is hoofddocent strafrechtswetenschappen aan de Erasmus Law School Rotterdam, hoofdredacteur van dit tijdschrift en visiting fellow aan de Renmin University en de China University of Politics and Law, Beijing.

    Against the background of a discussion of classical and modern concepts of punishment, the first implying the imposition of suffering as essence and the second encompassing all varieties of sanctions implying restrictions but not necessarily some form of suffering the author rejects the suggestion of the second concept, that punishment should be defined without any reference to imposing suffering. There are conceptual advantages to sticking to the classical definition of punishment, such as the fact that it is clearly differentiated from the concept of measurements, which are sanctions imposed without any demand of ‘guilt’ on the side of a perpetrator. Also there are good reasons to maintain the element of (imposition of ) ‘intended pain’ in the concept of punishment, but it is this element – the intentional imposition of pain and suffering – that makes the author reject the activity of punishing as unethical. Non-violent sanctions are conceivable and feasible and should on ethical grounds be preferred. This is explored with reference to the work of Tähtinen. In close connection with this idea the author argues that we should redefine criminal justice (in the Dutch language: ‘strafrecht’ meaning the right to punish and laws regarding punishment) to mean that it is the discipline that responds to crimes and offences, without any defining reference to punishment (‘misdaadrecht’, meaning the laws regarding ((responding to)) crime).


Jacques Claessen
Jacques Claessen is universitair docent straf(proces)recht aan de Universiteit Maastricht en redacteur van dit tijdschrift. Hij is tevens medeoprichter van de stichting Mens en Strafrecht (www.mens.nl).
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.