The aim of the present research was to gain insight into the topic of ‘task-related rule-breaking behavior’ (TRB) among Dutch police officers. TRB is a more refined alternative for the concept of noble cause corruption and has been defined as: police officers breaking rules or formal agreements for the purpose of acting in a manner that contributes to the lawful police task. Qualitative research has been conducted within one of the ten regional police forces in the Netherlands. Results show that TRB appears to be a relatively common phenomenon during policework. Behaviors are categorized in sixteen categories and five overarching outlines. In addition, attention is given to several important factors that could be related to TRB being distinguishable between police officers’ individual responsibility and organizational factors. To handle TRB, it is recommended to pay attention to the police officers’ approach of judging and rationalizing their own behavior, their level of knowledge, and social skills. Furthermore, organizational structure (i.e., spam of control) and police leadership may, among other factors, play an important role in encouraging TRB. Especially the way supervisors deal with police officers’ professional autonomy needs specific attention in order to reduce TRB. Autonomy needs guidance in the form of clear orders followed by feedback and coaching. Also, an active form of ethical leadership is needed. An action framework is presented that could be helpful to supervisors to judge and thereby reduce forms of TRB.

In this article, we analyze which aspects of performance theory and the procedural justice-based model are explaining the trust of shopkeepers in the police and local government. Utilizing a survey of 156 shopkeepers and 94 semi-constructed interviews with shopkeepers, which are located at the South Shopping Boulevard in Rotterdam (The Netherlands), the study finds that shopkeepers have a relatively high trust in the police and local government. This is surprising because various attempts in the past 30 years to revive the high street by the government have failed to improve its bad image, as dwindling visitor numbers, poor turnover, limited range of retailers, empty shops and high crime and offence levels show only too plainly. The findings also highlight that ethnic minority respondents have more trust in local government than Dutch shopkeepers. The explanation therefor is sought in the dual frame of reference theory.

Traditionally, the mayor has an important role as a citizen’s father and as a maintainer of public order. In the context of the so-called ‘undermining’ criminality, the mayor has been increasingly empowered with new legal instruments to combat undermining criminality. Some mayors see themselves as a sheriff. However, in the Dutch Municipal Act, the mayor only has a task of maintaining the public order. How does this task relate to combating undermining criminality? What is the role of the mayor in the combat of undermining criminality? Nowadays, there is no legal basis in the Dutch Municipal Act to equip the mayor with crime-fighting duties. This article proposes to equip the mayor with a legal duty as a crime fighter.

Citizens investigating crimes themselves is a growing trend, because of democratization of information (e.g. social media), tools (e.g. apps) and knowledge (e.g. explanimations on YouTube). More and more citizens do their own research as modern Sherlocks. The police has to handle these trends in line with participant wishes and the law, but does not yet have concrete tools to do so. This article explores how the police participate in contemporary citizen criminal investigations, including the difficulties and benefits experienced. The obtained insights of the presented research serve as guidance, which can help police officers understand how to participate with citizens who have started, or want to start, a criminal investigation. The presented model explains how police can use it to better guide and stimulate, but also stop or protect citizens in their investigative activities. An app with professional guidance was piloted in four police units to participate with citizens that do their own research and learn from expectations and experiences. Citizens need guidance, but more importantly expect a certain degree of reciprocity in collaborating with police in criminal investigations.

Citizen engagement in public safety is increasing rapidly. This trend, also known as responsibilisation, causes new dilemmas for (local) goverments. This article is based on a case study on a local group in the Dutch municipality Neder-Betuwe. These vigilantes arrest suspects by using extensive and professional equipment. By using the theory of normative practices this article compares the practices of the vigilantes and the local police. Their attitude to themes as safety, community values and the core values of the Dutch rule of law differs. This puts pressure on cooperation between vigilantes and police officers.

Over the years, the use of data and digital technology in neighbourhood watch groups for prevention and detection of crime and citizens initiatives to enhance public safety has increased due to social and technological changes of citizen participation in coproduction of safety and digitization of economy and society. This causes a transition towards a new technology regime, a shift from a ‘closed’ information and communication technology regime owned by governmental organizations towards (inter)national ‘open’ platforms, which in turn challenges the current policy regime. This transition creates new societal expectations and challenges, often with contrasting dynamics. For instance, citizens are becoming the so-called ‘eyes and ears’ for government in prevention and detection of crime in neighbourhoods, while professionals are increasingly expected to coproduce safety with citizens through new forms of prevention and detection. With the rise of data and digital technology such as platforms and applications citizens are increasingly enabled to take the lead and initiate collaboration and organize new forms of prevention and surveillance in their own neighbourhoods.
Both in literature as in public policy practice, neighbourhood prevention and crime detection in general is addressed. However, less attention is spent on the role and impact of data and digital technology. We propose this is an issue because the emerging digital technology regime requires a new conceptual view wherein citizen initiatives are no longer perceived as merely instrumental to government interventions, but are understood as coproducers of public safety in their neighbourhoods, as part of a broader societal shift in which citizens are enabled by digital technology to organize their own data environments. Based on the introduction of digital coproduction, we illustrate four case examples to explain which opportunities for safety professionals and local governments arise to create a policy regime that suits the emerging digital technology regime.

This contribution reports about a research in a medium-sized municipality on the possibilities of giving municipalities an instrument to determine at the earliest possible stage which neighborhoods are at (increased) risk of exposure to organized crime and its consequences. We are searching for indicators to measure that exposure to give direction to preventive measures. Our focus is on the erosion of structures and foundations of society as a result of activities of organized crime, eventually resulting in the infringement of the rule of law. It is therefore not about the phenomenon of organized crime itself, but about its effects on society. This requires clarification and measurability of the concept. In this first exploration, we focus on the following five manifestations of the effect of organized crime: The emergence of a subculture: not recognizing government authority; the emergence of takeover of power in the neighborhood; the emergence of vulnerable groups of citizens; the creation of the image: crime pays off; and the emergence of unfair competition.

Based on a retrospective analysis of six large scale and fatal fires in the Netherlands, an improvement in terms of meeting the needs of victims can be seen. A comparison of the legal settlement of these fires shows mayor differences in the fulfilling of different aspects of social justice that are identified in social psychology. Two victim needs commonly associated with retributive justice – financial compensation and a thorough, neutral investigation into the causes of the disaster – were fulfilled to a higher degree after the most recent fires than after those that occurred decades ago. The legal settlement after the New Year’s fire in Volendam (2001) appears – at least on paper – to have been more just from the victim’s point of view than the ones after the other incidents. Empirical research into the experienced social justice after the New Year’s fire can be valuable to assess the factors that can lead to a just settlement after disasters.

Crises and disasters can seriously affect the health, well-being and functioning of the people involved. From a governance perspective, it is important that public leaders and crisis managers are aware of what the psychosocial dimension of crisis management entails. The objective of the current contribution is to analyse dilemmas and challenges described in evaluations of crises that occurred in the Netherlands between 2012 and 2016. Thirty-six evaluations were analysed against the background of a theoretical framework combining crisis leadership tasks and psychosocial support principles along the crisis life cycle. Public leaders and crisis managers had to deal with classical crisis problems concerning coordination, collaboration and communication. Other recurring themes were linked to social media, and the tension between tasks such as meaning making (social recognition), account giving and learning. Moreover, the analysis illustrates how difficult it is to gain insight into the needs, problems and vulnerabilities of the individuals and groups affected.

The promises of Big Data, predictive policing and artificial intelligence hold a key position in the public debate for quite some time now. Optimists tell that it is possible to predict where criminal events will occur before they take place. This would implicate a major shift towards a crime and insecurity preventive society, feeding on our cultural longing for a secure future. Therefore we give algorithms and deep learning access to more and more aspects of our lives. But how realistic and desirable is the application of Big Data techniques in the area of security?
In this article we put focus on the research question ‘In which way can Big Data and predictive policing support good governance of security?’, that has led our study. By exploring the central concepts, the processes behind them and their results in the domain of public security, we conclude that there are only rather disappointing results from the application of these techniques: crime and insecurity have not dropped when the police and other organizations turned to Big Data techniques. Instead, many negative side effects occurred. We search for explanations in six central academic critiques on the application of these techniques in the area of security.
We have found several ways to guaranty principles of good governance in the application of Big Data techniques, but these require a firm paradigm shift on Big Data in general. The heuristics of security professionals should not be overshadowed by technological promises: the professional should always be in the loop, must understand the way predictions come into existence and must be able to correct flaws and bugs of (semi-)automated decisions. We conclude that safeguarding public security must remain human work in which Big Data techniques can assist.

Within the group of Dutch foundlings, 28% are migratory foundlings: children coming from abroad to the Netherlands (inbound foundlings), and children going abroad from the Netherlands (outbound foundlings). According to the rational choice theory, there is at some point a rational decision behind human action, based on consideration of costs and benefits – terminology reminiscent of the origins within economic science. When viewed from that perspective, cross-border abandonment may be regarded to be a conscious effort to hinder detection. After all, abandonment of foundlings has been a criminal offence in the Netherlands since at least the Middle Ages. There is therefore also a vested interest in not attracting attention. Anyone abandoning a child and wishing to protect their identity will be attracted to locations that lack effective supervision, defined as guardianship within the criminological routine activities theory. However, the less familiar a location, the trickier it is to avoid visibility. Does the rational consideration of costs and benefits result in migratory foundlings being abandoned just over the border (in order that the perpetrators attract the least possible attention) or actually further inland (in order to detract from the cross-border activity, for example)? Is there a comparable choice in terms of distance when people abandon native foundlings – children found in their country of birth? Relevant questions indeed, as greater insight into such variables can support the direction taken by detection activities. This study is an exploratory analysis of the distance between the domicile or birth location and the abandonment location of cross-border foundlings. The results will then be compared with the distances in the case of domestic foundlings.

Between 2013-2017 there were many ISIS videos circulating. It was generally assumed that these videos would encourage young Muslims to radicalize and join ISIS. But what do we actually know about the imaginary world of young people? Do sociological aspects such as the economic, cultural and religious background play a decisive role in this? Can we use the films and TV series that young people see as an entry into their imaginary world? To what extent can image analysis provide knowledge that contributes to safety issues? Commissioned by the Department of Counterterrorism, Radicalization and Extremism (CTER) of the Dutch National Police, the IVMV Foundation invited, in a comparative pilot study, twenty Dutch youngsters (10 with a Muslim background and 10 police students) to share their viewing experiences with five trailers (3 Hollywood, 1 Netflix, 1 not explicit violent ISIS video) that touched on the ISIS issue. This resulted in a research report and a film (in Dutch as well as in English) that was presented in November 2017 (De Mare et al. 2017a; De Mare 2017b). A remarkable result was that their viewing experiences and feelings showed a lot of similarity.

Until recently, Dutch merchant ships could not rely on privately contracted maritime security staff to protect themselves against pirates. On the one hand, the argument prevailed that the State had to retain the monopoly on the use of force and, on the other hand, one also feared for the escalation of violence or international incidents. Nowadays, however, more and more European countries allow for the use of privately contracted armed security personnel on board merchant ships. As a result, the Dutch Parliament has adopted a bill containing rules for the use of armed private security guards on board Dutch maritime merchant ships (Law to Protect Merchant Shipping 2019 (published in the Dutch official Gazette on June 7th, 2019)).
The author addresses the question whether because of the new law a level playing field will emerge with the Merchant Navies from the neighboring Flag States of Belgium, the United Kingdom, Spain and Denmark, presenting a comparative analysis of their domestic legislation.
The Dutch law clearly regulates the use of force and the master has the final responsibility for everything that happens under his authority. In principle, the security guards may only apply violence as the master has determined that it is necessary. Innovative is that there is a reporting obligation whereby every incident should be reported with images and sound recordings. It seems, however, that the law is especially made to protect and secure and not necessarily to provide a solution for situations in which pirates come on board.
It is clear that the intention of the legislator is to leave the monopoly on the use of force in the hands of the State. However, the adoption of this law to protect merchant shipping could constitute a first step in enabling the use of force by other actors than the State, which in itself is groundbreaking. Before being able to go on this road, there are still countless political (mainly related to the sovereignty of a State) and legal challenges (mainly concerning the use of force and respect for human rights) to be addressed.

In the context of criminal investigations police and prosecution can appeal to the public for information to further their case. This decision cannot be taken lightly and requires a balancing exercise between the rights of the suspect (and other people involved), specifically the right to privacy, the interest of criminal investigations, such as the identification of the suspect or witnesses, and public pressure to fight crime.
In the current digital society, the prosecutor can choose between a wide range of (new) media and modes of communication to ask for information. Next to wanted notices on paper posters and broadcasts on television, appeals for information are published on websites, social media platforms, apps and digital screens. Citizens can modify and share these appeals and they can comment on them. This necessitates careful consideration by the prosecutor on whether and how to appeal for information. After all, these appeals could lead to DIY-policing or online vigilantism (digilantism), leading to infringements on the right to privacy and even possibly to misidentification of suspects.
This article contributes to the continuing debate. We describe the legal framework the prosecution has to take into account in such cases. The importance of a considered decision is illustrated by three cases in which judicial authorities appealed to the public for help in the criminal investigations, resulting in massive (media) attention and consequently affecting the eventual criminal case against the defendants. In two of these cases the prosecutorial decision to involve the public’s help resulted in a violation of the defendants’ rights to privacy and consequently had to be remedied by the court. Both cases led to social, legal and political debate about the balance between privacy and crime control.

The Dutch Police Act provides the police with the legal power to gather information about a person on the internet as long as this does not cause more than ‘a limited violation of privacy’. If the police are gathering more information about a person they need a special legal power laid down in the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure. The dividing line between ‘a limited violation of privacy’ and ‘more than a limited violation of privacy’ is not always clear. The legislator is preparing a new piece of legislation to provide the police with more clarity. This article discusses the suggested law article with respect to the gathering of information from open sources. Furthermore, this article suggests to not only regulate the amount of information the police are gathering but also the kind of tools that the police use (simple search machine versus an advanced web crawler).

The most important mechanism for crime prevention is just the presence of guardians. Some counter arguments against this thesis are discussed and rejected. By manipulating the presence of guardians it is possible to influence the level of prevention. It is argued that a large scale evaluation of such measures is wanted.

Like many other European countries the Netherlands experienced a major influx of refugees in the fall of 2015. A majority of the population supported providing shelter to the refugees, but not without worries and anxieties about the effects of that influx, which sometimes lead to limited, local forms of social unrest. A study was started to shed more light on the worries and fears that existed in the population, on the assumptions these were based upon and on whether these worries and fears could lead to social unrest on a larger scale. The study was explorative, based on an eclectic, multi methods approach. The findings show that worries and anxieties were not limited to those who were opposed to the influx of migrants, but existed among supporters as well. The worries and anxieties were of a diverse nature, on topics like security, livability, economics, perceived (in)justice and socio-cultural aspects of life. A clear, credible answer or policy from the government was missed. When compared to the findings of earlier studies on the influx of migrants, some worries and anxieties seemed closely connected to what might be expected, in other cases a distinct ‘disconnect’ was found. These could be understood however when distorting mechanisms were taken into consideration that have been described in studies of more general security perceptions. As the worries and anxieties on the influx of refugees resonated other existing worries, anxieties and fears in society, a ‘cocktail of concerns’ was created that, given the right trigger, could have led to social unrest on a larger scale.

This contribution describes the legal basis for revoking or denying a residence status to asylum seekers and individuals in possession of a status who are considered war criminals, ‘common’ criminals or terrorists, in what way the Dutch government tries to identify these persons, and what the nature and size of this group is. The authors conclude that identifying alleged war criminals and jihadists is particularly complex and that there is a tension with respect to the use, necessity and desirability of making available concrete tools in the form of indicators to first line professionals for the purpose of identifying jihadists. The presence of unwanted but unremovable (criminal) asylum seekers is undesirable from the perspective of society. The suggestion is made to provide them, under certain conditions, with a temporary residence status.

The Mobile Security Monitor (MSM) is a form of migration policing in the border areas of the Netherlands, carried out by the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee (KMar). The MSM has a complex legal and policy framework, merging migration control aims with certain elements of crime control. This raises the question how the officers carrying out the MSM interpret the exact aim of the instrument and their own accompanying powers and what this means for the way they carry out their task. Our results show that many officers see ‘catching criminals’ an important part of their job and that in order to achieve this, they sometimes make ‘creative use’ of their wide-ranging powers. Although similar results have been found in research with the police, KMar officers differ because of their ability to combine migration law and criminal law powers. This fits in with the process of crimmigration and the broader tendency of ad-hoc instrumentalism, which refers to a way of thinking about law and legal procedures in which the formal distinction between legal domains is considered less important and criminal justice actors can freely choose the most effective instrument to deal with the situation at hand. This means that the formal ground for a decision is not always transparent, especially not for people that are subjected to the MSM. Moreover, criminal law enforcement contains many more legal and procedural safeguards than administrative controls.