This article analyses the relation between Islam, politics and citizenship. It analyses three currents within Islam: Salafism, Islamism, and modernism. The central argument is that most modern Islamic currents do not have a concept of politics as an independent ‘field’ where compromises can be made concerning societal problems. The only current that provide the space for a pluriform, open political debate is Islamic modernism. Through its humanism and the centrality of the common good and not the text, modernism embraces not only the concept of politics as free space but also the concept of active citizenship.

This article investigates the role of ‘implicit religion’ in extremism, including those forms that do not explicitly call upon formal religion. Extremist quasi-religious narratives expose an exclusionary logic, which is mirrored by radical ways of thinking about counter-extremism. This unfailingly leads to more polarization. Extremism can only be countered by radical openness. Resilient democracy requires that citizens, politicians and professionals are willing and able to maintain open hearts and minds. Implicit religion can support this. Spiritual counselors and scientists of religion need to support the creation of spiritual narratives and rituals that strengthen democratic resilience.

Verkrijging door extinctieve verjaring van beperkte zakelijke genotsrechten door middel van inbezitneming is een onderwerp waarover verwarring en onzekerheid bestaat. Is dit in de praktijk eigenlijk wel mogelijk? Deze bijdrage beschrijft de (on)mogelijkheden waaronder het recht van erfdienstbaarheid, het recht van opstal en het recht van erfpacht door middel van louter inbezitneming kunnen worden verkregen.

Although traditionally, it has been argued that intelligence and security services can barely be discussed in public – a veil of secrecy makes a thorough and informed debate almost impossible, the outside world is ignorant, say the insiders – we argue that today’s mature civil society does not accept that anymore. Although the government has struggled to address social anxiety and political criticism in the past decades, communication and strategic discussions have never received proper attention. Due to the technological changes, affecting the intelligence practice as well as daily life of citizens, the authors argue that the positioning of intelligence and security services in the broader democratic state should receive structural attention and sustainable communication efforts.