Zoekresultaat: 38 artikelen

x
Jaar 2013 x
Artikel

Geen woorden maar daden

De invloed van legitimiteit en vertrouwen op het nalevingsgedrag van verkeersovertreders

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden perceptions of legitimacy, Compliance, procedural justice
Auteurs Marc Hertogh, Bert Schudde en Heinrich Winter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    For many years, most regulatory research focused on instrumental motivations for compliance, which emphasize the role of rewards and punishments related to (dis)obeying the law. However, more recent studies have also emphasized the potential role of normative motivations. Using survey data collected from a sample of 1,182 traffic offenders in the Netherlands, and building on the ‘procedural justice model’ which was first developed in Why People Obey the Law (Tyler 1990), this paper explores how perceptions of legitimacy shape regulatory compliance. The study makes three contributions to the literature. First, this study is one of the few studies in which the procedural justice model is tested in Continental Europe. Second, following recent critiques in the literature, the paper introduces three modifications to the original model. Third, and unlike most previous studies, this study is not entirely based on self-reporting by drivers, but includes actual evidence about their behavior as well. With regard to the self-reported level of compliance, our study largely confirms Tyler’s (1990) original findings. Yet with regard to the observed level of compliance, there are also important differences between both studies. These findings will be explained by shifting our focus of attention from Tyler’s ‘universalistic’ approach to ‘legitimacy-in-context’ (Beetham 1991).


Marc Hertogh
Marc Hertogh is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Centrale thema’s in zijn onderzoek zijn de maatschappelijke effecten van wetgeving, de maatschappelijke beleving van recht en rechtsstaat, en de legitimiteit van het overheidsoptreden. Recente publicaties: Scheidende machten: de relatiecrisis tussen politiek en rechtspraak (Boom Juridische uitgevers 2012) en (met Heleen Weyers) Recht van onderop: antwoorden uit de rechtssociologie (Ars Aequi Libri 2011).

Bert Schudde
Bert Schudde studeerde sociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en is werkzaam als onderzoeker bij Pro Facto. Hij heeft brede onderzoekservaring in toegepast beleids- en evaluatieonderzoek, grootschalig surveyonderzoek en kwantitatieve analyse.

Heinrich Winter
Heinrich Winter is directeur van Pro Facto, bureau voor bestuurskundig en juridisch onderzoek, onderwijs en advies. Daarnaast is hij in Groningen bijzonder hoogleraar Toezicht. Hij is veelvuldig betrokken bij wetsevaluaties, waarover hij ook publiceert. Recente publicaties over toezicht zijn ‘Waar blijft het interbestuurlijk toezicht?’, in: Publicaties van de Staatsrechtkring nr. 16 (Wolf Legal Publishers 2012) en ‘Meten van de effecten van toezicht. Yes we can?’, Tijdschrift voor Toezicht 2012/2, p. 63-80. In 2013 schreef hij met Bert Marseille de handleiding Professioneel behandelen van bezwaarschriften voor BZK/Prettig contact met de overheid.
Diversen

Towards Governance-Based Regulation?

The WRR Report on Toezien op publieke belangen in European and International Perspective

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 4 2013
Trefwoorden WRR-rapport, governance-based regulation, international perspective
Auteurs Jonathan Zeitlin
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Until quite recently, the Netherlands had an outstanding reputation at home and abroad for administrative regulation and supervision (‘toezicht’) of markets and public services. Over the past decade, however, that reputation has been tarnished, both internally and externally, by a series of regulatory failures and scandals across a wide range of policy domains. In this article the author gives us the international perspective.


Jonathan Zeitlin
Jonathan Zeitlin is Professor of Public Policy and Governance, Distinguished Faculty Professor, and Jean Monnet Chair in European and Transnational Governance in the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam.
Diversen

De responsieve toezichthouder

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 4 2013
Trefwoorden WRR-rapport, responsive regulation, tripartite handhaving
Auteurs Judith van Erp en Karin van Wingerde
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In deze bijdrage vragen de auteurs aandacht voor een aspect van responsive regulation dat beter aansluit bij de handhavingspraktijk; namelijk dat het de vraag adresseert hoe toezichthouders gebruik kunnen maken van het maatschappelijke krachtenveld dat bestaat uit verschillende publieke en private partijen. Deze zogenoemde tripartite handhaving is ten onrechte onderbelicht gebleven en biedt aanknopingspunten om aan de maatschappelijke functie van toezicht die de WRR bepleit, verder invulling te geven.


Judith van Erp
Dr. J.G. van Erp is universitair hoofddocent criminologie aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

Karin van Wingerde
Dr. C.G. van Wingerde is universitair docent criminologie aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Diversen

Rugwind van de WRR, tegenwind verzekerd

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 4 2013
Trefwoorden WRR-rapport, toezichthouder, ACM
Auteurs Chris Fonteijn
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De auteur is verheugd te zien dat er veel parallellen zijn tussen de aanbevelingen van de WRR en de strategie en werkwijze van ACM. ACM voelt zich daardoor gesteund, want hun opvattingen en de daarop gebaseerde toezichtstijl zijn niet zonder controverse. Veranderingen gaan nu eenmaal nooit zonder slag of stoot. De auteur gaat op enkele van de aanbevelingen in het bijzonder in.


Chris Fonteijn
Mr. C.A. Fonteijn is bestuursvoorzitter van de Autoriteit Consument & Markt. Hiervoor is hij voorzitter geweest van zowel de Nederlandse Mededingingsautoriteit (NMa) als de Onafhankelijke Post en Telecommunicatie Autoriteit (OPTA).
Diversen

Het publieke belang van professionele toezichthouders

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 4 2013
Trefwoorden WRR-rapport, toezichthouder, inspecteur, personeel, opleiding
Auteurs Ko de Ridder
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In dit artikel bespreekt de auteur het WRR-rapport vanuit het perspectief van de toezichthouder. Hiermee doelt hij op de ‘toezichthoudende instantie’ maar meer nog op de ‘persoon van de inspecteur’


Ko de Ridder
Dr. J. de Ridder is hoogleraar bestuurskunde aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

    In this interview with prominent representatives of the British Acas and the Belgian Social Mediators Service important developments in the ADR labour practice are discussed. In particular, the impact of the financial crisis and the ever advancing globalization process on the labour negotiating climate is the centre of attention.


Annie de Roo
Annie de Roo is hoofdredacteur van TMD, verbonden aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en mediator.

Rob Jagtenberg
Rob Jagtenberg is docent aan de Erasmus Universiteit te Rotterdam en verricht aldaar vergelijkend onderzoek naar mediation en conflictmanagement in Europa. Tevens is hij redacteur van TMD.
Article

Access_open From Legal Pluralism to Public Justification

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden legal pluralism, diversity and law, law and justification, concept of law
Auteurs Dr. Emmanuel Melissaris
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The paper offers an argument for a conception of legal pluralism, which has some substantive upshots and at least partly alleviates that legal pluralism may regress to rampant relativism. In particular, I will argue that law in its pluralist conception is inextricably linked to the requirement of public justification. This is not by way of appealing to any transcendental normative ideals but as a matter of entailment of the very practice of law. But, perhaps to the disappointment of many, this procedural requirement is the only practical consequence of the concept of law. For thicker, substantive limits to what law can do and for ways in which legal pluralism may be reduced in real contexts one will have to turn to the actual circumstances furnishing the law with content and a different kind of thinking about the law.


Dr. Emmanuel Melissaris
Associate Professor of Law, Law Department, London School of Economics and Political Science. I am grateful to Sanne Taekema and Wibo van Rossum as well as the two anonymous referees for their helpful critical comments. A version of this paper was presented at the School of Law, Queen Mary University of London. I am indebted to all the participants in that seminar and particularly to Roger Cotterrell, Ann Mumford, Maskymilian del Mar, Prakash Shah, Valsamis Mitsilegas, Wayne Morrison, Michael Lobban, Richard Nobles and David Schiff. Many thanks also to Sean Coyle, George Pavlakos, Alexis Galan Avila and Mariano Croce for their valuable comments on earlier drafts of the paper. I am solely responsible for all remaining errors.
Article

Access_open A Turn to Legal Pluralism in Rule of Law Promotion?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden legal pluralism, rule of law promotion, legal reform, customary law, non-state legal systems, donor policy
Auteurs Dr.mr Ronald Janse
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the past 25 years, international organizations, NGOs and (mostly Western) states have spent considerable energy and resources on strengthening and reforming legal systems in developing countries. The results of these efforts have generally been disappointing, despite occasional successes. Among donors, one of most popular explanations of this failure in recent years is that rule of law promotion has wrongly focused almost exclusively on strengthening the formal legal system. Donors have therefore decided to 'engage' with informal justice systems. The turn to legal plu‍ra‍lism is to be welcomed for various reasons. But it is also surprising and worrisome. It is surprising because legal pluralism in developing countries was a fact of life before rule of law promotion began. What made donors pursuing legal reform blind to this reality for so long? It is worrisome because it is not self-evident that the factors which have contributed to such cognitive blindness have disappeared overnight. Are donors really ready to refocus their efforts on legal pluralism and 'engage' with informal justice systems? This paper, which is based on a review of the literature on donor engamenet with legal pluralism in so-called conflict affected and fragile states, is about these questions. It argues that 7 factors have been responsible for donor blindness regarding legal pluralism. It questions whether these factors have been addressed.


Dr.mr Ronald Janse
Ronald Janse is Associate Professor of Law, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Article

Access_open At the Crossroads of National and European Union Law. Experiences of National Judges in a Multi-level Legal Order

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden national judges, legal pluralism, application of EU law, legal consciousness, supremacy and direct effect of EU law
Auteurs Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The notion and theory of legal pluralism have been witnessing an increasing interest on part of scholars. The theory that originates from the legal anthropological studies and is one of the major topical streams in the realm of socio-legal studies slowly but steady started to become a point of departure for other disciplines. Unavoidably it has also gained attention from the scholars in the realm of the law of the European Union. It is the aim of the present article to illustrate the legal reality in which the law of the Union and the national laws coexist and intertwine with each other and, subsequently, to provide some insight on the manner national judges personally construct their own understanding of this complex legal architecture and the problems they come across in that respect. In that sense, the present article not only illustrates the new, pluralistic legal environment that came into being with the founding of the Communities, later the European Union, but also adds another dimension to this by presenting selected, empirical data on how national judges in several Member States of the EU individually perceive, adapt to, experience and make sense of this reality of overlapping and intertwining legal orders. Thus, the principal aim of this article is to illustrate how the pluralistic legal system works in the mind of a national judge and to capture the more day-to-day legal reality by showing how the law works on the ground through the lived experiences of national judges.


Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
Urszula Jaremba, PhD, assistant professor at the Department of European Union Law, School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. I am grateful to the editors of this Special Issue: Prof. Dr. Sanne Taekema and Dr. Wibo van Rossum as well as to the two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments. I am also indebted to Dr. Tobias Nowak for giving me his consent to use the data concerning the Dutch and German judges in this article. This article is mostly based on a doctoral research project that resulted in a doctoral manuscript titled ‘Polish Civil Judges as European Union Law Judges: Knowledge, Experiences and Attitudes’, defended on the 5th of October 2012.
Article

Access_open Towards Context-Specific Directors' Duties and Enforcement Mechanisms in the Banking Sector?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden banking sector, directors' duties, financial crisis, context-specific doctrines, public enforcement
Auteurs Wasima Khan LL.M.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The global financial crisis gives reason to revisit the debate on directors’ duties in corporate law, mainly with regard to the context of banks. This article explores the need, rationale and the potential for the introduction of context-specific directors’ duties and enforcement mechanisms in the banking sector in the Netherlands from a comparative perspective.
    Chiefly, two legal strategies can be derived from the post-crisis developments and calls for legal reforms for the need and rationale to sharpen directors’ duties in the context of the banking sector in order to meet societal demands. The two strategies consist in shifting the scope of directors’ duties (i) towards clients’ interests and (ii) towards the public interest.
    Subsequently, this article explores the potential for context-specific directors’ duties and accompanying enforcement mechanisms. Firstly, it is argued that the current legal framework allows for the judicial development -specific approach. Secondly, such context-specific directors’ duties should be enforced through public-enforcement mechanisms to enhance the accountability of bank directors towards the public interest but currently there are too much barriers for implementation in practice.
    In conclusion, this article argues that there is indeed a need, rationale and potential for context-specific directors’ duties; yet there are several major obstacles for the implementation of accompanying public-enforcement mechanisms. As a result, the introduction of context-specific directors’ duties in the banking sector may as yet entail nothing more than wishful thinking because it will merely end in toothless ambitions if the lack of accompanying enforcement mechanisms remains intact.


Wasima Khan LL.M.
PhD Candidate at the Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. The author wishes to express her gratitude for valuable comments on an earlier draft of this article from Prof. Vino Timmerman and Prof. Bastiaan F. Assink at the Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam, as well as the Journal‘s editors and peer reviewers. Any errors remain those of the author.
Article

Access_open An Eclectic Approach to Loyalty-Promoting Instruments in Corporate Law: Revisiting Hirschman's Model of Exit, Voice, and Loyalty

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Eclecticism, corporate law & economics, corporate constitutionalism, loyalty-promoting instruments
Auteurs Bart Bootsma MSc LLM
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This essay analyses the shareholder role in corporate governance in terms of Albert Hirschman's Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. The term 'exit' is embedded in a law & economics framework, while 'voice' relates to a corporate constitutional framework. The essay takes an eclectic approach and argues that, in order to understand the shareholder role in its full breadth and depth, the corporate law & economics framework can 'share the analytical stage' with a corporate constitutional framework. It is argued that Hirschman's concept of 'loyalty' is the connecting link between the corporate law & economics and corporate constitutional framework. Corporate law is perceived as a Janus head, as it is influenced by corporate law & economics as well as by corporate constitutional considerations. In the discussion on the shareholder role in public corporations, it is debated whether corporate law should facilitate loyalty-promoting instruments, such as loyalty dividend and loyalty warrants. In this essay, these instruments are analysed based on the eclectic approach. It is argued that loyalty dividend and warrants are law & economics instruments (i.e. financial incentives) based on corporate constitutional motives (i.e. promoting loyalty in order to change the exit/voice mix in favour of voice).


Bart Bootsma MSc LLM
PhD candidate in the corporate law department at Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Email: bootsma@law.eur.nl. The research for this article has been supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) in the Open Competition in the Social Sciences 2010. The author is grateful to Ellen Hey, Klaus Heine, Michael Faure, Matthijs de Jongh and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions. The usual disclaimer applies.
Article

Access_open Human Rights Courts Interpreting Sustainable Development: Balancing Individual Rights and the Collective Interest

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden Operationalizing sustainable development, human rights, individual rights/interests, collective rights/interests, human rights courts
Auteurs Emelie Folkesson MA
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article uses a generally accepted conceptualisation of sustainable development that can be operationalized in a judicial context. It focuses on the individual and collective dimensions of the environmental, economic and social pillars, as well as the consideration of inter-generational and intra-generational equity. Case law from the European, African and American systems is analysed to reveal if the elements of sustainable development have been incorporated in their jurisprudence. The analysis reveals that the human rights bodies have used different interpretative methods, some more progressive than others, in order to incorporate the elements of sustainable development in the scope of their mandate, even if they do not mention the concept as such. The overall conclusion is that sustainable development has been operationalized through human rights courts to a certain extent. Sometimes, however, a purely individualised approach to human rights creates a hurdle to further advance sustainable development. The conclusion creates the impression that sustainable development is not just a concept on paper, but that it in fact can be operationalized, also in other courts and quasi-courts. Moreover, it shows that the institutional structure of human rights courts has been used in other areas than pure human rights protection, which means that other areas of law might make use of it to fill the gap of a non-existing court structure.


Emelie Folkesson MA
PhD Candidate in public international law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. The author would like to thank Prof. Ellen Hey, Prof. Klaus Heine and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable insights and constructive comments on the drafts of this article. The usual disclaimer applies.
Artikel

De clementiethriller als nieuw filmgenre

Het gebruik van gedramatiseerde voorlichtingsfilms in het toezicht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden clementiethriller, voorlichtingsfilm, film, voorlichting, media
Auteurs Dr. Judith van Erp
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Een van de nieuwste ontwikkelingen in het gebruik van media door toezichthouders is het produceren van gedramatiseerde films, om ondernemers voor te lichten over het toezicht en af te schrikken. Met name in het mededingingstoezicht hebben mededingingsautoriteiten in verschillende landen realistische ‘docudrama’s’ geproduceerd waarin fictieve kartels worden ontmaskerd en bestraft. In deze bijdrage bespreek ik de vier belangrijkste ‘clementiefilms’ van dit moment: ‘Clementie in kartelzaken’ van de Nederlandse Mededingingsautoriteit; de ‘Competition Compliance film’ van de Britse Office of Fair Trading; het Australische ‘The Marker’ van de ACCC; en de Zweedse film ‘Be the first to tell – a film about leniency’. Hoewel de verhaallijnen in de films overeenkomsten vertonen, hebben ze inhoudelijk verschillende boodschappen. In deze bijdrage wordt een vergelijking gemaakt van de vorm en inhoud van deze films, en worden ze afgezet tegen inzichten uit sociaalwetenschappelijk onderzoek naar de achtergrond van mededingingsovertredingen om een indruk te geven van de mogelijke bijdrage van deze films aan de naleving.


Dr. Judith van Erp
Dr. J.G. van Erp is universitair hoofddocent criminologie aan de Erasmus School of Law.

Bastiaan Leeuw
Mr. H.B.M. Leeuw is werkzaam als PhD-kandidaat bij Maastricht University.

Frans L. Leeuw
Frans L. Leeuw is directeur van het WODC in Den Haag en als hoogleraar Recht, openbaar bestuur en sociaal-wetenschappelijk onderzoek verbonden aan Maastricht University.

Martin Morawski
M. Morawski is werkzaam bij Baker & McKenzie Amsterdam N.V.
Article (peer reviewed)

Peer_reviewedAccess_open Ontdubbelde handhaving

Tijdschrift Netherlands Administrative Law Library, september 2013
Auteurs Albertjan Tollenaar PhD.
Samenvatting

    With the aim to reduce administrative burden for supervised many inspections are 'deduplicated': similar groups of citizens are treated similarly and similar activities are carried out in the same way within one organization. Deduplication should increase flexibility within the inspection as inspectors are able to fulfill their job in any domain. Deduplication is based on the fulfillment of two conditions. The first is that the enforcement tools, or the powers that perform these inspections, are not too different. The second relates to the use of these instruments that has to be somewhat uniform as well. These conditions are assessed in a case study of the Transport and Water Management Inspectorate. It is concluded that in particular the style of rule enforcement differs and is not easy to standardize.


Albertjan Tollenaar PhD.
Artikel

Laten we geen boete opleggen...

Het arrest Schenker: de mogelijkheden voor een beroep op dwaling en afzien van boeteoplegging in het Europese mededingingsrecht

Tijdschrift Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht, Aflevering 8 2013
Trefwoorden Mededinging, Verordening 2003/1/EG, Boete-immuniteit, Vertrouwensbeginsel
Auteurs Mr. E.S. Lachnit LLM
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Op 18 juni 2013 wees het Hof van Justitie arrest in de zaak Schenker. Deze zaak draaide om de mogelijkheid voor nationale mededingingsautoriteiten af te zien van boeteoplegging voor een schending van de Europese mededingingsregels. Enerzijds omdat de betrokken ondernemingen zich beriepen op dwaling, anderzijds omdat er medewerking was verleend in het kader van een nationale clementieprocedure. De uitspraak van het Hof van heeft gevolgen voor de positie van ondernemingen en advocaten, en voor de beschikkingsautonomie van nationale mededingingsautoriteiten.
    HvJ EU 18 juni 2013, zaak C-681/11, Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde, Bundeskartellanwalt/Schenker & Co. AG, e.a., n.n.g.


Mr. E.S. Lachnit LLM
Mr. E.S. (Eva) Lachnit is promovenda economisch publiekrecht aan de Universiteit Utrecht en verbonden aan het Europa Instituut aldaar. Haar onderzoek ziet op alternatieve vormen van publieke handhaving binnen het mededingingsrecht.

Johan Weerkamp
Johan Weerkamp is NMI Registermediator en gespecialiseerd in familiebedrijven in land- en tuinbouw en gebruik van ruimte in het landelijk gebied.

    Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) are on the rise in Europe and different Member States. In May 2013, the European Parliament and Council adopted an ADR Directive (n 2013/11) and ODR Regulation (n 524/2013) that will bring major changes in the European and national ADR landscapes. Both instruments are analyzed in this article. On the other hand, attention is also paid to the Belgian ODR-platform Belmed, that was created in 2011 and facilitates Belgian consumers to make an online ADR application. Finally, a plea is made for the exchange of data between ODR-platforms and national regulators, as a means to detect mass cases.


Stefaan Voet
Stefaan Voet is doctor-assistent aan de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid aan de Universiteit Gent en advocaat bij de balie Brugge.
Toont 1 - 20 van 38 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.