In the Netherlands, the legal possibilities for post-custodial supervision have been extended considerably in recent years. A currently passed law aims to further increase these possibilities specifically for dangerous (sex) offenders. This law consists of three separate parts that may all result in life-long supervision. In the first two parts, the supervision is embedded in the conditional release after either a prison sentence or the safety measure ‘ter beschikking stelling’ (TBS). This paper focuses on the third part of the law, which introduces an independent supervisory safety measure as a preventive continuation of both a prison sentence and the TBS measure. Inevitably, this new independent sanction raises questions about legitimacy and necessity, on which this paper reflects from a human rights perspective. Against the background of the existing Dutch penal law system, the content of the law is thoroughly assessed in view of the legal framework of the Council of Europe and the legal principles of proportionality and less restrictive means. In the end, we conclude that the supervisory safety measure is not legitimate nor necessary (yet). Apart from the current lack of (empirical evidence of) necessity, we state that there is a real possibility of an infringement of Article 5(4) ECHR and Article 7 ECHR, a lack of legitimising supervision ‘gaps’ in the existing penal law system, and finally a lack of clear legal criteria. Regardless of the potential severity of violent (sex) offenses, to simply justify this supervisory safety measure on the basis of ‘better safe than sorry’ is not enough.

France literally ‘discovered’ sexual abuse following neighbour Belgium’s Dutroux case in the late 1990s. Since then, sex offenders have been the focus of politicians, media and law-makers’ attention. Further law reforms have aimed at imposing mandatory supervision and treatment, and in rare cases, preventive detention. The legal framework for mandatory supervision and detention is rather complex, ranging from a mixed sentence (custodial and mandatory supervision and treatment upon release or as a stand-alone sentence) to so-called ‘safety measures’, which supposedly do not aim at punishing an offence, but at protecting society. The difference between the concepts of sentences and safety measures is nevertheless rather blurry. In practice, however, courts have used safety measures quite sparingly and have preferred mandatory supervision as attached to a sentence, notably because it is compatible with cardinal legal principles. Procedural constraints have also contributed to this limited use. Moreover, the type of supervision and treatment that can thus be imposed is virtually identical to that of ordinary probation. It is, however, noteworthy that a higher number of offenders with mental health issues who are deemed ‘dangerous’ are placed in special psychiatric units, something that has not drawn much attention on the part of human rights lawyers.

Niet aannemelijk dat realisatie van een geluidscherm niet slechts een theoretische mogelijkheid is.

Overzicht hoofdlijnen jurisprudentie planschade.

Representatieve invulling van de planologische mogelijkheden horeca. Geluid. Parkeren. Wijzigingsbevoegdheid.

Onderzoek naar de wijze waarop letselschades worden afgewikkeld in Engeland, Noorwegen en Nederland brengt relevante verschillen in afwikkelingsculturen aan het licht. De Engelse wijze van afwikkeling is sterk gericht op afwikkeling in rechte en is vergaand vercommercialiseerd. De Noorse praktijk kenmerkt zich door een op sociale zekerheid gebaseerde afwikkelingscultuur buiten rechte, die in hoge mate is gebaseerd op onderling vertrouwen. De Nederlandse praktijk van schadeafwikkeling heeft met de Engelse gemeen dat zij vorm krijgt in een commerciële setting tegen de achtergrond van het civiele aansprakelijkheidsrecht. Met de Noorse praktijk heeft zij gemeen dat het proces van afwikkeling in hoge mate is gebaseerd op overleg buiten rechte en op onderling vertrouwen.

In Europe, female circumcision has been considered a grave violation of human rights. However, many European countries fail to combat this illegal practice. This article answers the question why criminal law enforcement with regard to female circumcision seems to fail in various European states, with the exception of France. To answer this question, this article analyses various models of citizenship.

Voorafgaand aan de benoeming van ministers (en staatssecretarissen in Nederland) van de landen in het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden vindt er een toetsing van de benoembaarheid plaats. Deze toetsing, ook wel aangeduid als screening, is in de afzonderlijke landen verschillend geregeld. De auteur bespreekt de overeenkomsten en verschillen van de screening die allen als doel hebben de integriteit van het bestuur in het Koninkrijk te waarborgen. De revue passeren aldus de wijze van benoeming van ministers, de vastlegging van de toetsing (variërend van een schrijven van de minister-president aan de Tweede Kamer tot een wet in formele zin in Curacao en Sint Maarten), de legaliteit van de verschillende regelingen maar ook de feitelijk uit te voeren onderzoeken en daaraan te verbinden conclusies. Afgesloten wordt met een aanbeveling tot uniformering van de screening in het Koninkrijk.

People with mental illness usually experience higher rates of disability and mortality. Often, health care systems do not adequately respond to the burden of mental disorders worldwide. The number of health care providers dealing with mental health care is insufficient in many countries. Equal access to necessary health services should be granted to mentally ill people without any discrimination. E-mental health is expected to enhance the quality of care as well as accessibility, availability and affordability of services. This paper examines under what conditions e-mental health can contribute to realising the right to health by using the availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality (AAAQ) framework that is developed by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Research shows e-mental health facilitates dissemination of information, remote consultation and patient monitoring and might increase access to mental health care. Furthermore, patient participation might increase, and stigma and discrimination might be reduced by the use of e-mental health. However, e-mental health might not increase the access to health care for everyone, such as the digitally illiterate or those who do not have access to the Internet. The affordability of this service, when it is not covered by insurance, can be a barrier to access to this service. In addition, not all e-mental health services are acceptable and of good quality. Policy makers should adopt new legal policies to respond to the present and future developments of modern technologies in health, as well as e-Mental health. To analyse the impact of e-mental health on the right to health, additional research is necessary.

This article discusses hedge funds activism based on Hirschman’s classic. It is argued that hedge funds do not create the loyalty concerns underlying the usual short-termism critique of their activism, because the arbiters of such activism are typically indexed funds, which cannot choose short-term exit. Nevertheless, the voice activated by hedge funds can be excessive for a particular company. Furthermore, this article claims that the short-termism debate cannot shed light on the desirability of hedge funds activism. Neither theory nor empirical evidence can tell whether hedge funds activism leads to short-termism or long-termism. The real issue with activism is a conflict of entrepreneurship, namely a conflict between the opposing views of the activists and the incumbent management regarding in how long an individual company should be profitable. Leaving the choice between these views to institutional investors is not efficient for every company at every point in time. Consequently, this article argues that regulation should enable individual companies to choose whether to curb hedge funds activism depending on what is efficient for them. The recent European experience reveals that loyalty shares enable such choice, even in the midstream, operating as dual-class shares in disguise. However, loyalty shares can often be introduced without institutional investors’ consent. This outcome could be improved by allowing dual-class recapitalisations, instead of loyalty shares, but only with a majority of minority vote. This solution would screen for the companies for which temporarily curbing activism is efficient, and induce these companies to negotiate sunset clauses with institutional investors.

This article explores the investigative methods used by corporate security within organisations concerned about property misappropriation by their own staff and/or others. The research methods are qualitative: interviews, observations and case studies carried out between October 2012 and November 2015. The findings include that, even though corporate investigators do not have the formal investigative powers enjoyed by police and other public agencies, they do have multiple methods of investigation at their disposal, some of which are less used by public investigative agencies, for example the in-depth investigation of internal systems. Corporate investigators also rely heavily on interviews, the investigation of documentation and financial administration and the investigation of communication devices and open sources. However, there are many additional sources of information (for example, site visits or observations), which might be available to corporate investigators. The influences from people from different backgrounds, most notably (forensic) accountants, (former) police officers, private investigators and lawyers, together with the creativity that is necessary (and possible) when working without formal investigative powers, make corporate security a diverse field. It is argued that these factors contribute to a differentiation between public and private actors in the field of corporate security.

Willen toezichthouders en bestuursorganen gebruikmaken van big data predictive analytics, dan moeten zij dit doen binnen de daarvoor geldende bestuursrechtelijke en privacyrechtelijke kaders. Zij krijgen te maken met rechtsvragen over beschikbaarheid en bruikbaarheid en – omdat er bij toezicht vrijwel altijd op enig moment sprake zal zijn van een verwerking van persoonsgegevens – de privacywetgeving. In dit artikel komen aan de orde over welke gegevens toezichthouders kunnen en mogen beschikken, welke conclusies zij op basis van big-data-analyses kunnen trekken en hoe in dit alles de belangen van rechtssubjecten kunnen worden gewaarborgd.

Digitale gegevensuitwisseling tussen toezicht- en opsporingsinstanties betekent een nieuwe manier van werken. Voor welke vragen staat de uitvoeringspraktijk en is die er klaar voor? En hoe staat het met de wetgeving? In dit artikel staat de praktijk bij de totstandkoming van Inspectieview Milieu centraal. Dit traject is een voorbeeld van hoe het elders gaat of zou kunnen gaan. Maar er is meer nodig… In eerste instantie een brede verkenning naar de manier waarop toezicht en opsporing met elkaar samenwerken en op welke wijze ICT daarbij kan ondersteunen. Een belangrijke vervolgvraag is wat daar wettelijk nog voor nodig is. De uitvoeringspraktijk hoeft daar niet op te wachten. Er kan al gestart worden met een gezamenlijke ‘Gedragscode samenwerking en informatie-uitwisseling toezicht en opsporing’ zodat niemand meer het wiel hoeft uit te vinden.

Deze bijdrage bespreekt de aard en reikwijdte van het internationaal gezondheidsrecht, een tak van het internationaal publiekrecht die nauw verweven is met het nationale gezondheidsrecht. De standaarden van de Wereldgezondheidsorganisatie komen aan bod, evenals de relevante mensenrechtenbepalingen. De conclusie luidt dat het internationaal gezondheidsrecht een dynamisch veld is dat voor grote uitdagingen staat, waaronder het ontwikkelen van nieuwe standaarden in antwoord op de mondiale stijging van chronische ziektes en het ter verantwoording roepen van invloedrijke niet-statelijke actoren zoals de farmaceutische industrie en de tabaksindustrie.

De regulering van het gebruik van gegevens en lichaamsmateriaal voor medisch-wetenschappelijk onderzoek nadat de patiënt is overleden, vertoont lacunes. Voor gegevens zijn de artikelen 7:457 eerste lid en 7:458 BW richtinggevend. Voor lichaamsmateriaal wordt een toegespitste regeling node gemist. Voor obductie en ontleding in het belang van de wetenschap zou de wet nadere voorwaarden moeten stellen.

In een arrest van 20 maart 2015 heeft de belastingkamer van de Hoge Raad het toetsingskader voor het gebruik van strafrechtelijk onrechtmatig verkregen bewijs in belastingprocedures uiteengezet. De houdbaarheid van dit toetsingskader is echter in de literatuur ter discussie gesteld naar aanleiding van het WebMindLicenses-arrest van het Hof van Justitie van 17 december 2015. In deze bijdrage wordt beoordeeld of het toetsingskader van de belastingkamer van de Hoge Raad daadwerkelijk aanpassing behoeft.
HR 20 maart 2015, nr. 13/03959, ECLI:NL:HR:2015:643.
HvJ EU 17 december 2015, zaak C-419/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:832.

In this paper, I suggest a discourse theory of basic legal rights that is superior to rival approaches, such as a will-based or an interest-based theory of rights. Basic rights are reciprocally and generally justifiable and binding claims on others (agents or institutions) that they should do (or refrain from doing) certain things determined by the content of these rights. We call these rights basic because they define the status of persons as full members of a normative order in such a way that they provide protection from severe forms of legal, political and social domination. The very ground of these rights is the status of persons as free and equal normative authorities within the order they are subject to. In other words, these rights are grounded in a fundamental moral right to justification.

This paper responds to Rainer Forst’s article ‘The Justification of Basic Rights’. I argue that Forst's main thesis is difficult to pin down, partly because it is formulated in significantly distinct ways at numerous points. I offer a possible formulation of the argument but note that this encapsulates a fallacy; I further argue that his inference of the basic rights seems to imply an over-moralisation of social life and that his argument does not distinguish rights with discretionary and non-discretionary content. Then I query Forst’s claim that a right to justification is a condition of engaging in justificatory discourse. This leads to the conclusion that what goes into the process of justification, including who figures in the discursive community, are irreducibly political questions, whose answers cannot be convincingly specified antecedently by a form of moral legislation. I argue that actual discursive processes allow for considerably more contingency and contextual variability than Forst’s construction acknowledges. This extends, as I suggest in conclusion, to the idea that content can be specified via the Kantian notion that acceptability requires the ‘containment’ of an actor's ends by another, such as an affected party.