In the 19th century in many Western states, the close relationship between Church and State came to an end and the Roman Catholic Church developed into a major and active player on social and educational level in society separate from the State.
This was due, on the one hand, to the constitutional changes in the Western states from the end of the 18th century, which led to the gradual introduction of the formal principle of separation of Church and State. On the other hand, it was a result of the search for a new position of the Roman Catholic Church in society that also influenced the theological reflection of the Church on society.
The ecclesiastical reflection on the ideal relationship between Church and State took shape in the course of this process in the Ius Publicum Ecclesiasticum. The ecclesiastical view on the relationship between believers/citizens, society and State simultaneously took shape in Catholic social doctrine, which today still offers a model for modern society. In Catholic social doctrine, the believer/citizen is the connecting element between Church and State in a secular society. The ‘state doctrine’ of the Catholic Church is presented in Catholic social doctrine as an ideal image of the democratic constitutional state in which man is central and forms the central link between Church, society and secular State.

De Dienstenrichtlijn bevat een opmerkelijke wetgevingshypothese voor het omgevingsrecht: dat schaarse vergunningen in het bijzonder geschikt zijn voor het management van schaarse natuurlijke hulpbronnen en dat deze door een selectie tussen gegadigden verdeeld moeten worden. Wat maakt schaarse vergunningen voor natuurlijke schaarste zo bijzonder? Deze bijdrage verkent deze hypothese in het licht van de economische theorie en een analyse van de betekenis van schaarste voor publieke rechten. Het resultaat is een economische blik op het omgevingsrecht en enkele reflecties op de rechtsontwikkeling van schaarse publieke rechten.

On 1 April 2014, the Dutch Act on Adolescent Criminal Law entered into force. With this law, the age limit in article 77c of the Criminal Code, which allows for the application of juvenile criminal law to young adults, was stretched from 21 to 23 years. In this article stock is taken of the developments that have taken place in the four years after the introduction of this law. In practice, article 77c Criminal Code is increasingly being applied in case of young adult suspects, however still to a little extent. Among others, this has to do with confusion about the target group that qualifies for the adolescent criminal law. The access to and justification for the application of the law show a very diverse picture.

The apologies offered by young offenders in restorative justice conferences are often of poor quality. In this article the difficulties that accompany the offering of excuses are discussed. Offenders sometimes lack the language skills to pronounce an adequate apology, are anxious or insecure or believe that they have not been treated fairly. The mediation setting itself also has effects: sometimes perpetrators feel intimidated and feel compelled to say something that resembles an excuse. A related problem is that the perceptions about the sincerity of the apology can vary considerably. This perception-mismatch also occurs among victims: what one victim considers sincere is ‘fake’ for another. Many people
– also advocates of restorative justice – trust that the offender will offer a sincere apology, without realizing that this is not self-evident in a thorny confrontation setting. This article aims to temper this sincerity-expectation.

The Halt-intervention is an extra-judicial intervention for young people who have committed a minor offense. This article zooms in on the results of a literature review concerning the efficacy of offering an apology, one of the core elements of the Halt-intervention. Offering an apology leads to more insight into the consequences of their behavior and it increases the sense of moral norms. Shame and guilt play a crucial role in this process. The effect of the excuse can be increased by good mediation between perpetrator and victim, good preparation of the conversation, and the drafting of a contract. These instructions can also be applied when offering an apology in other interventions.