Zoekresultaat: 16 artikelen

x
Jaar 2010 x
Artikel

Het belang van ideologie

Een reactie op Marc Groenhuijsen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 4 2010
Trefwoorden restorative justice, Paradigma, Tailoring, victims
Auteurs John Blad
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Blad responds to Groenhuijsen by showing how political decisions in the Netherlands, after successful experiments with restorative justice for juveniles and adults, were based on the belief that criminal justice would lose its punitive foundation and tenor when restorative justice practices would become integrated in the justice system. Criminal justice should not be about resolving conflicts between victims and offenders and the type of mediation, that could lead to an agreement as an important element to be considered in sentencing, was therefore rejected. In so far as restorative justice ideology took influence, it seems to have been a misconception of restorative justice as merely a new form of penal abolitionism. The fact that restorative justice does not deny the legitimacy of the provisions in the substantive criminal law and that all important restorative projects co-operate with criminal justice agencies was apparently ignored. Against the background of the dominant political culture of ‘punitive populism’ and intensified use of severe punishments it seems highly unlikely that abandoning the ambition to develop a restorative justice paradigm would further the implementation of restorative justice.


John Blad
John Blad is hoofddocent strafrechtswetenschappen, verbonden aan de Erasmus Law School van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Artikel

Vertrouwen in toezicht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 4 2010
Trefwoorden toezicht, vertrouwen, controle
Auteurs Dr. ir. F.E. Six
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In het Nederlandse debat over de rol van vertrouwen in toezicht en handhaving heerst verwarring over het begrip vertrouwen. Dit artikel kijkt kritisch naar de argumenten en schept meer duidelijkheid over het begrip en de voor toezicht belangrijke relatie tussen vertrouwen en controle. Vertrouwen is onvermijdelijk aan de orde in toezichtrelaties en kan dus het beste expliciet in toezichttheorie geconceptualiseerd worden. De conceptualisatie van vertrouwen in de responsieve toezichttheorie van Braithwaite e.a. is echter aan herziening toe. Aan de hand van recente inzichten uit de vertrouwensliteratuur worden uitgangspunten en contouren van een mogelijke vertrouwensbenadering in toezicht geschetst.


Dr. ir. F.E. Six
Dr. ir. F.E. Six MBA is werkzaam aan de Vrije Universiteit, Afdeling Bestuurswetenschappen.
Artikel

Ik en mijn medepatiënt

Juridisering in de gezondheidszorg

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden market of health care, legalization, patients rights
Auteurs Margo Trappenburg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Two types of legalization can be distinguished. In type 1 legal relations between parties are changed, without consequences for others. In legalization type 2 a change in legal positions does have consequences for third parties. The gradual change in the legal position of patients, managerial measures and the transition to ‘demand driven care’ have changed the relations between patients and doctors, nurses etc. But they had also profound external effects. They have influenced especially other interests than the quality of medical care, like equal treatment of patients and professional discretion. Decision making about the granting of rights should incorporate these external effects.


Margo Trappenburg
Margo Trappenburg is universitair hoofddocent bij de Utrechtse School voor Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschappen en bijzonder hoogleraar sociaal-politieke aspecten van de verzorgingsstaat aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zij schrijft over gezondheidszorgbeleid, ethische kwesties in de zorg en over rechtvaardigheidsvraagstukken. In 2008 verscheen van haar hand Genoeg is genoeg. Over gezondheidszorg en democratie. Meer informatie op www.margotrappenburg.nl.
Discussie

Access_open Plugging the Legitimacy Gap? The Ubiquity of Human Rights and the Rhetoric of Global Constitutionalism

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden global constitutionalism, legitimacy, human rights, Neil Walker, post-state democracy
Auteurs Morag Goodwin
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper approaches Walker’s work from the perspective of the ubiquity of human rights language within the rhetoric of global constitutionalism. Building on Walker’s description of the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy, what I wish to suggest is that the spread of human rights discourse is intimately connected with attempts to apply constitutional discourse beyond the state. By highlighting the way in which human rights have become place-takers for political legitimacy in discussions of international constitutionalism, the paper is intended to challenge Walker to state his own position more forcefully and to develop further his insight concerning the irresolvable tension in the iterative relationship between constitutionalism and democracy.


Morag Goodwin
Morag Goodwin is Assistant Professor of Law and Development at the Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society at Tilburg Law School, the Netherlands.
Artikel

Access_open Constitutionalism and the Incompleteness of Democracy: An Iterative Relationship

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden constitutionalism, globalization, democracy, modernity, postnational
Auteurs Neil Walker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The complexity of the relationship between democracy and modern constitutionalism is revealed by treating democracy as an incomplete ideal. This refers both to the empirical incompleteness of democracy as unable to supply its own terms of application – the internal dimension – and to the normative incompleteness of democracy as guide to good government – the external dimension. Constitutionalism is a necessary response to democratic incompleteness – seeking to realize (the internal dimension) and to supplement and qualify democracy (the external dimension). How democratic incompleteness manifests itself, and how constitutionalism responds to incompleteness evolves and alters, revealing the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy as iterative. The paper concentrates on the iteration emerging from the current globalizing wave. The fact that states are no longer the exclusive sites of democratic authority compounds democratic incompleteness and complicates how constitutionalism responds. Nevertheless, the key role of constitutionalism in addressing the double incompleteness of democracy persists under globalization. This continuity reflects how the deep moral order of political modernity, in particular the emphasis on individualism, equality, collective agency and progress, remains constant while its institutional architecture, including the forms of its commitment to democracy, evolves. Constitutionalism, itself both a basic orientation and a set of design principles for that architecture, remains a necessary support for and supplement to democracy. Yet post-national constitutionalism, even more than its state-centred predecessor, remains contingent upon non-democratic considerations, so reinforcing constitutionalism’s normative and sociological vulnerability. This conclusion challenges two opposing understandings of the constitutionalism of the global age – that which indicts global constitutionalism because of its weakened democratic credentials and that which assumes that these weakened democratic credentials pose no problem for post-national constitutionalism, which may instead thrive through a heightened emphasis on non-democratic values.


Neil Walker
Neil Walker is Regius Professor of Public Law and the Law of Nature and Nations at the University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Discussie

Access_open The Co-originality of Law and Democracy in the Moral Horizon of Modernity

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden co-originality, deliberative democracy, Habermas, Lefort, modernity
Auteurs Stefan Rummens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper argues that Neil Walker’s analysis of the complementary relationship between democracy and constitutionalism remains one-sided. It focuses only on the incompleteness of democracy and the democracy-realizing function of constitutionalism rather than also taking into account the reverse complementary and constitution-realizing function of democracy. In this paper, I defend a fuller account that takes into account this mutual complementarity between democracy and constitutionalism. Such an alternative approach is consequential for Walker’s argument in two respects. In terms of the general analysis of the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism, my adjusted approach leads to a defence of the Habermasian thesis of the co-originality of constitutionalism and democracy which is too quickly dismissed by Walker himself. A fuller appreciation of this co-originality suggests that the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy is perhaps, after all, more singularly complementary (as opposed to being both complementary and oppositional) than Walker recognizes. In terms of the more specific analysis of the impact of globalization, this adjusted approach tilts the argument in favour of the critics of current practices of postnational constitutionalism. Without complementary postnational democratic structures, this constitutionalism remains problematic and potentially oppressive.


Stefan Rummens
Stefan Rummens is Assistant Professor of Political Theory at the Institute for Management Research of the Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Discussie

Access_open Constitutionalism and the Incompleteness of Democracy

A Reply to Four Critics

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden constitutionalism, globalization, democracy, modernity, postnational
Auteurs Neil Walker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This reply to critics reinforces and further develops a number of conclusions of the original paper. First, it answers the charge that it is biased in its discussion of the relative standing of constitutionalism and democracy today, tending to take the authority of the former for granted and concentrating its critical attention unduly on the incompleteness of democracy, by arguing that contemporary constitutionalism is deeply dependent upon democracy. Secondly, it reiterates and extends the claim of the original paper that the idea and practice of democracy is unable to supply its own resources in the development of just forms of political organization. Thirdly, it defends its key understanding of the overall relationship between democracy and constitutionalism as a ‘double relationship’, involving both mutual support and mutual tension. A fourth and last point is concerned to demonstrate how the deeper philosophical concerns raised by the author about the shifting relationship between democracy and constitutionalism and the conceptual reframing they prompt are important not just as an explanatory and evaluative window on an evolving configuration of political relations but also as an expression of that evolution, and to indicate how this new conceptual frame might condition how we approach the question of a democracy-sensitive institutional architecture for the global age.


Neil Walker
Neil Walker is Regius Professor of Public Law and the Law of Nature and Nations at the University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Discussie

Access_open Democracy, Constitutionalism and the Question of Authority

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden international constitutionalism, democracy, international law, fragmentation, international politics
Auteurs Wouter G. Werner
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper agrees with Walker on the existence of a tension between democracy and constitutionalism, but questions whether democracy and (international) constitutionalism necessarily depend on each other. While democracy needs constitutionalism on normative grounds, as an empirical matter it may also rest on alternative political structures. Moreover, it is questionable whether democracy is indeed the solution to the incompleteness of international constitutionalism. Traditional forms of democracy do not lend themselves well to transplantation to the international level and could even intensify some problems of international governance. Attempts to democratize international relations should be carried out prudentially, with due regard for possible counterproductive effects.


Wouter G. Werner
Wouter Werner is Professor of Public International Law at VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Redactioneel

Access_open Presentation

Editors of this special issue

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2010
Auteurs Mireille Hildebrandt, Bart van Klink en Eric Tjong Tjin Tai
Auteursinformatie

Mireille Hildebrandt
Mireille Hildebrandt is Associate Professor of Jurisprudence at Erasmus University Rotterdam and senior researcher at the centre for Law Science Technology and Society Studies (LSTS), Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Bart van Klink
Bart van Klink is Professor of Legal Methodology at VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Eric Tjong Tjin Tai
Eric Tjong Tjin Tai is Professor of Private Law at Tilburg University.

    How can the social environment of a prison be accurately assessed? Why is it important to measure? How should the prison experience be represented in empirical research? How do we capture distinctions between prisons, which can be good or bad in so many different ways? There is considerable consensus about the inadequacy of narrow and selective performance measures, such as hours spent in purposeful activity or serious assaults, in representing prison quality. The difficulties are both methodological and conceptual. This paper will outline one attempt to address these questions in England and Wales. Based on a series of studies aimed at identifying and measuring aspects of prison life that ‘matter most’, prisoners describe stark differences in the moral and emotional climates of prisons serving apparently similar functions. The ‘differences that matter’ are in the domain of interpersonal relationships and treatment. A developmental programme of empirical research on the quality of life in prison suggests that (a) some prisons are more survivable than others and (b) important differences in identifiable aspects of prison quality exist and may be related to outcomes. These findings have implications for our understanding of the meaning of terms like ‘inhuman and degrading’ treatment as well as for our uses and expectations of the prison.


Alison Liebling
Alison Liebling is hoogleraar Criminology & Criminal Justice aan de Universiteit van Cambridge en is directeur van het Prison Research Centre.
Artikel

Access_open Constitutionele toetsing in een democratie zonder volk

Een kelseniaanse rechtvaardiging voor het Europees Hof van Justitie

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2010
Trefwoorden Kelsen, Democracy, Legitimacy, European Union, European Court of Justice
Auteurs Quoc Loc Hong
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article draws on Hans Kelsen’s theory of democracy to argue that, contrary to conventional wisdom, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the democratic legitimacy of either the European Union (EU) or the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The legitimacy problems from which the EU in general and the ECJ in particular are alleged to suffer seem to result mainly from our rigid adherence to the outdated conception of democracy as popular self-legislation. Because we tend to approach the Union’s political and judicial practice from the perspective of this democracy conception, we are not able to observe what is blindingly obvious, that is, the viability and persistence of both this mega-leviathan and the highest court thereof. It is, therefore, imperative that we modernize and adjust our conception of democracy in order to comprehend the new reality to which these bodies have given rise, rather than to call for ‘reforms’ in a futile attempt to bring this reality into accordance with our ancient preconceptions about what democratic governance ought to be. Kelsen is the democratic theorist whose work has enabled us to venture into that direction.


Quoc Loc Hong
Quoc Loc Hong was a FWO Postdoctoral Fellow from 2007 to 2009 at the University of Antwerp. He is currently an independent researcher.

Maurits Sanders
Maurits Sanders is hoofddocent bestuurskunde bij Saxion en promovendus aan de faculteit Management en Bestuur aan de Universiteit Twente. Zijn promotieonderzoek gaat over de institutioneel-juridische inbedding van beleids- en besluitvorming bij publiek-private samenwerking.
Artikel

Draagt aansprakelijkheidsrecht bij aan de voedselveiligheid?

Over de preventieve werking van schadeclaims en aansprakelijkheidsverzekering

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2010
Trefwoorden voedselveiligheid, regulering, aansprakelijkheid, aansprakelijkheidsverzekering, preventie, schadeclaim, ‘moreel risico’, voedingsindustrie, productaansprakelijkheid, sociale werking
Auteurs Tetty Havinga
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Most research on food safety has focussed on direct forms of food safety regulation. This paper explores the opportunities for product liability law to encourage food safety measures within firms. It aims to contribute to the discussion on the role public and private actors could have in providing an effective food safety system. Liability law is assumed to promote food safety. The author distinguishes three ways in which liability law could act as an incentive for firms to implement enhanced food safety controls: liability claims, liability insurance and direct effects of liability law on management strategy. The paper concludes that the assumption that liability laws make firms sensitive to prevention of food safety risks is too optimistic. However, liability law could stimulate a culture within firms to take responsibility for food safety. Existing economic and legal analysis could gain from a sociological analysis of the actual impact of liability on company decisions.


Tetty Havinga
Tetty Havinga is universitair hoofddocent bij het Instituut voor Rechtssociologie van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Zij verricht rechtssociologisch onderzoek op diverse terreinen, waaronder de relaties tussen het bedrijfsleven en recht, regulering van voedsel, beleidsuitvoering, arbeidsrecht en gelijke behandeling. Ze is co-auteur van Specialisatie loont?! Ervaringen van ondernemingen met specialistische rechtspraakvoorzieningen (2010).
Artikel

De werkgever en het kelderluik

Over toepassing van de Kelderluik-criteria bij artikel 7:162 en artikel 7:658 BW

Tijdschrift Arbeidsrechtelijke Annotaties, Aflevering 1 2010
Trefwoorden gezichtspunten, Kelderluik-factoren, Bayar/Wijnen, werkgeversaansprakelijkheid, onrechtmatige daad, context
Auteurs Mr. J.P. Quist
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In het Kelderluik-arrest uit 1965 heeft de Hoge Raad een viertal gezichtspunten geformuleerd die van belang (kunnen) zijn bij de beantwoording van de vraag of sprake is van onrechtmatige gevaarzetting. Veertig jaar later, in het arrest Bayar/Wijnen, heeft de Hoge Raad deze factoren herhaald en daaraan een gezichtspunt toegevoegd in een geval waarin het ging om een werknemer die bij het werken met een gevaarlijke machine letsel had opgelopen. In dit artikel wordt ingegaan op de manier waarop invulling aan de verschillende gezichtspunten (en enkele andere relevante omstandigheden) wordt gegeven. De toepassing van de gezichtspunten bij op artikel 6:162 BW en artikel 7:658 BW gebaseerde vorderingen lijkt veel op elkaar. Een opvallend verschil is echter dat het enkele feit dat het bij artikel 7:658 BW om aansprakelijkheid van de werkgever gaat, van groot belang is voor de strengheid waarmee toepassing aan de Kelderluik-factoren en andere (mogelijk) relevante omstandigheden wordt gegeven. Daar waar de Kelderluik-factoren bij artikel 6:162 BW (in beginsel) een neutraal karakter hebben, wijzen zij bij artikel 7:658 BW veel meer in de richting van een bevestigende beantwoording van de aansprakelijkheidsvraag. De context waarbinnen een bepaalde schadeveroorzakende gebeurtenis zich heeft voorgedaan, is dan ook van grote invloed op de wijze waarop de verschillende factoren worden ingekleurd. In deze bijdrage komen ook andere overeenkomsten en verschillen tussen toepassing van artikel 6:162 BW en artikel 7:658 BW aan bod.


Mr. J.P. Quist
Mr. J.P. Quist is verbonden aan de sectie Arbeidsrecht van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en tevens advocaat bij Adriaanse van der Weel Advocaten te Middelburg (www.avdw.nl).
Artikel

Case study: the international CSR conflict and Mediation Supply-chain responsibility – the article revisited one year later

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 1 2010
Trefwoorden corporate social responsibility, international CSR conflicts, supply-chain responsibility, CSR
Auteurs Sjef Stoop, Ineke Zeldenrust, Gerard Oonk e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In TMD 2009-2 the article ‘Case study: the international CSR conflict and mediation. Supply-chain responsibility: western customers and the Indian textile industry’ was published. In this article, Tineke Lambooy describes the ins and outs of the multiparty dispute between G-Star, in origin a Dutch company, the Indian-Italian Fibres & Fabrics, the employees of Fibre & Fabrics International, the governments involved and a number of non-governmental organisations striving for good labour relations and labour conditions. Lambooy’s article resulted in four reactions that are published in this article.


Sjef Stoop
Sjef Stoop is trainer-consultant European Works Councils, FNV Formaat. Van 2003 tot 2007 was hij International Verification Coordinator van de Fairwear Foundation.

Ineke Zeldenrust
Ineke Zeldenrust is werkzaam bij Schone Kleren Campagne.

Gerard Oonk
Gerard Oonk is directeur Landelijke India Werkgroep.

Frans Evers
Frans Evers is voorzitter Nationaal Contactpunt voor de toepassing van de OESO-richtlijnen multinationale ondernemingen.

Lawrence Susskind
Lawrence Susskind is Ford Professor of Urban Studies and Planning aan het Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Ook is hij vice chair, Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.

Tineke Lambooy
Tineke Lambooy is a Senior Researcher at Nyenrode Business University (Nyenrode) in the field of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and she lectures in Legal Aspects of Globalisation-CSR, and Mergers & Acquisitions at Utrecht University, the Netherlands. She is completing a PhD on the Legal Aspects of CSR. Ms Lambooy assisted Mr Lubbers as a mediator in the conflict discussed in this contribution. E-mail: T.Lambooy@nyenrode.nl or T.E.Lambooy@uu.nl

Ruud Lubbers
Ruud Lubbers is mediator and inter alia former Prime Minister of The Netherlands.

Alessandra Arcuri
Associate Professor of International Economic Law and Law and Economics, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. I am grateful to the Editorial Board of the Erasmus Law Review, and in particular to Andria Naudé-Fourie for her precious support. Thanks also to Professor Yuwen Li, to all the referees who provided valuable feedback regarding the contributions in this issue, and to the participants in the Symposium on ‘Food Regulatory Regimes and the Challenges Ahead’, held during the Society for Risk Analysis — Europe Conference, King's College London, 21–23 June 2010, where some of the articles published in this issue were originally presented.
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.