Zoekresultaat: 17 artikelen

x

Willem-Jan Kortleven
Willem-Jan Kortleven is universitair docent rechtssociologie aan de Erasmus School of Law en redacteur van Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid.
Artikel

Integratief seksindustriebeleid in Nieuw-Zeeland

Succes voor een unieke sociale beweging

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden sekswerk, Nieuw-Zeeland, decriminalisering, sociale beweging, beleidsverandering
Auteurs Dr. Joep Rottier
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Contrary to its allies in other countries, the sex industry decriminalization movement in New Zealand, embodied by the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective (NZPC), achieved its goal in 2003. This article explores the reform of the sex industry policy in this country on the basis of a Social Movement Concept. Apart from the specific New Zealand culture, particularly the interaction between three social political aspects – awareness, political opportunities, and a strong social movement organisation – can be identified as crucial factors in realizing a decriminalized sex industry environment. The enactment of the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 meant a unique and huge success for a small sex workers movement.


Dr. Joep Rottier
Dr. Joep Rottier, onderzoeker, promoveerde in december 2018 aan de Universiteit Utrecht op de effecten van het seksindustrie decriminaliseringbeleid in Nieuw-Zeeland. Hij is bestuurslid van het Platform SekswerkExpertise Nederland.

Renée Kool
Renée Kool is hoofddocent Straf(proces)recht, verbonden aan het Willem Pompe Instituut van de juridische faculteit, Universiteit Utrecht.

Annemieke Wolthuis
Annemieke Wolthuis is juriste, verbonden aan Restorative Justice Nederland en bestuurslid van het European Forum for Restorative Justice.
Discussie

UNGASS 2016: in de Weense houdgreep

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden UNGASS, drug policy, war on drugs, harm reduction
Auteurs Pien Metaal MA
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution aims to discuss the main outcomes of the recent UNGASS (United Nations General Assembly Special Session) on Drugs that took place in New York from 19 to 21 April 2016. Based on my own participation in the preparatory discussions and political negotiations as civil society representative (through the work of NGO Transnational Institute), I argue that political divisions and entrenched institutional dynamics have transformed what could have been the beginning of the end of the war on drugs into a wasted opportunity for changing the status quo of the present world regime regarding the production, trafficking and use of illegal drugs. Despite high initial expectations after several governments expressed a clear concern about the effects of purely repressive policies, and the UN decision to organize the session 3 years earlier than planned, very soon it was clear that the session would not imply real changes in the current policies. The agenda setting was non-transparent and controlled by the most conservative factions and countries, largely excluding the views from NGO’s and academics in the final adopted resolution. The final document poorly reflects the rich discussions and developments that are taking place in many countries of the world, particularly the debates and policy developments in ‘the Americas’. A positive note is that the unchanged international UN conventions on drugs can hardly cope with developments taking place on cannabis policies in countries such as Canada, Uruguay, United States or Jamaica. Also other countries are more and more prepared to push for change on other essential questions, including the application of death penalty for drug offences, the access to controlled medicines, or the explicit application of ‘harm reduction’ approaches.


Pien Metaal MA
Pien Metaal, MA, is programmacoördinator van het Drugs & Democracy programma van het Transnational Institute (TNI), waar ze werkzaam is sinds 2002. Ze heeft veel artikelen, rapporten en bijdragen voor boeken geschreven over drugsbeleid in Latijns Amerika sinds 1996.
Discussie

Veranderingen in de visie op druggebruik – van een strafrechtelijk naar een gezondheidsparadigma

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden drug policy, paradigms, criminalisation, harm reduction, health problem
Auteurs drs. Franz Trautmann
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Various studies show that the views on the drug problem and appropriate policy responses have undergone profound changes from the 1960s onward. This article is analysing one of these changes, the decriminalisation of drug use, reflecting a fundamental change of view: understanding drug use as a health issue and not as crime. A useful heuristic to understand this type of change is Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm concept. He sees a paradigm as a set of beliefs that are shared by a scientific community and accepted by a wider community. A paradigm change is therefore a socio-psychological process rather than rooted in new scientific or research facts.
    The author analyses the change from the dominance of a crime to the dominance of a health paradigm reflecting its social-historic context, starting with the widely shared concerns about substance use related health problems in the 20th century. These concerns translated into two different views on the essence of these problems, a crime and a health paradigm. The first served as fundament of the international drug control efforts, resulting in the still governing drug prohibition. Yet, the health paradigm was also of influence from the start and gradually gained weight. From the 1970s onwards the health paradigm became more important as part of a wider reform movement. It started in the Netherlands and the UK as bottom-up process criticising criminalising the users of illicit drugs as inappropriate, detrimental for their health and inhumane. The health paradigm was seen as more appropriate.
    The author reflects on the benefits and disadvantages of the health paradigm. Its primary benefit is that it helps to understand the health problems related to drug use. A key disadvantage is its close relationship with the disease paradigm. The latter fits well with the generally negative view on drugs as dangerous or evil. It is encompassing the risk of ‘pathologising’ all forms of drug use and denying phenomena of unproblematic use for, among other things, recreational or spiritual purposes. Like the crime paradigm it can serve for control purposes. The drug user remains subject of control or disciplining policies and is not in charge of his/her own life. An additional problematic issue is that ‘softening’ the approach towards the users seems to be mirrored by a harder, more punitive approach to the producers and sellers of the substances, which are seen as villains, making available the drugs which deserve harsh punishment for ‘devastating’ the lives of users.
    The author concludes with a short discussion of the well-being paradigm as possible alternative for the health paradigm. It covers a broader spectrum than the health paradigm and helps to grasp the negative impact of (problem) drug use, reducing well-being, but is also useful in understanding the positive sides, enhancing well-being.


drs. Franz Trautmann
Drs. Franz Trautmann was Senior Drug Policy Advisor bij het Trimbos-instituut in Nederland. Hij werkte meer dan tien jaar aan harm reduction-programma’s in Amsterdam en leidde sinds 1990 tal van nationale en internationale projecten rond de ontwikkeling van preventie, behandeling en harm reduction-programma’s in verschillende landen en kwalitatief, praktijkgericht onderzoek (Rapid Assessment and Response). De laatste vijftien jaar legde hij zich tevens toe op onderzoek naar het functioneren van de internationale drugsmarkt en naar de beleidsrespons daarop. Enkele weken na het aanleveren van de laatste versie van zijn bijdrage, op 11 juni 2016, overleed hij geheel onverwacht.
Artikel

Roesmiddelen en regulering: oude wijn in nieuwe regels?

Inleiding

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden pleasurable substances, regulation, cannabis, war on drugs
Auteurs Prof. dr. Tom Decorte en Dr. Damián Zaitch
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In contrast with the critical, innovative ideas developed between the 1960s and the 1980s regarding the way we deal with illegal drugs in our societies, the current dominant approaches frame the issue of drugs as a matter of crime, public order, and control. Pleasurable substances have always existed and always will, and so the efforts to cope with them. However, we witness today remarkable developments at local, national and international levels in the fields of drug policies (on cannabis for example), drug trafficking (new routes, new actors) and drug use (new substances, new drug cultures), all of which deserve our attention and push us to think beyond the repressive paradigm. This contribution, which also serves as an introduction for this special issue of ToCC on drugs, aims to present an overview of the main developments taking place, and challenges ahead, within the three above-mentioned fields. There are new markets and trends in the use of legal and illegal pleasurable substances, particularly regarding synthetic drugs (amphetamines, methamphetamines and new psychoactive substances or NPS), tobacco and alcohol. Illegal drugs are supplied from changing countries and through new routes, while retailing increasingly takes place through the so-called cryptomarkets (online). Effective policies are rendered impossible by the fundamental repression paradox: the more intensive and effective the repression, the larger the profits of drug traffickers and the balloon effects (displacement). Despite the harms and negative effects of repressive policies have extensively been documented, a societal debate towards the regulation of illegal drugs is hindered by the use of false dichotomies or presuppositions, by the use of ethical or moral appeals, or by lack of political will. Also the debate in the media is static, superficial and full of clichés. Scientific research on drugs also follows specific agendas and it is focussed on particular aspects of the problem. Changes to end the ‘war on drugs’, certainly regarding cannabis, are however underway in many places at local and national level (Uruguay, Canada, US, Spain, etc.), this despite UN bureaucracies and international conventions that fiercely resist those changes.


Prof. dr. Tom Decorte
Prof. dr. Tom Decorte is antropoloog en hoogleraar criminologie aan de Universiteit Gent, en directeur van het Instituut voor Sociaal Drugsonderzoek (ISD). Hij publiceert geregeld over drugsbeleid, cannabisteelt en drugsgebruik.

Dr. Damián Zaitch
Dr. Damián Zaitch is universitair docent bij het Willem Pompe Instituut voor Strafrechtswetenschappen, Universiteit Utrecht. Hij onderzoekt en publiceert over drugshandel, drugsbeleid en georganiseerde misdaad in Nederland en Latijns-Amerika, en over diverse vormen van transnationale misdaad, globale criminele markten en organisatiecriminaliteit.
Artikel

Access_open Interview met Peter Cohen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden Peter Cohen, drug policy, CEDRO, drug research, emancipation
Auteurs dr. Damián Zaitch en prof. Dr. Tom Decorte
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Despite the fact that Peter Cohen has not written about drugs for the past 10 years, he remains one of the most influential and radical thinkers and researchers in the Netherlands in the field of drug use and drug policy. The former director of the CEDRO (Centrum voor Drugsonderzoek) at the University of Amsterdam is certainly a ‘significant other’ in the European drug landscape as he challenged, in the 1980s and 1990s, mainstream views and discourses on drugs held by the political, academic and health service establishments. In this interview we first discuss with him some of the key life events and intellectual sources that shaped his early choices first as student and later as young researcher, illustrating why and how he came to study drugs and remained at the university. Further, we focus on Cohen’s particular relation with the Amsterdam political elite in the 80s, which allowed him to develop the first large-scale studies in the Netherlands on different types of drug users. He further expands on his critique to the way in which drug use was at the time socially constructed in discourse and practice. During the second part of the 1990s, a new generation of politicians and managers (local and national government, but also at universities), changed on the one hand the political agenda about drugs, and imposed on the other serious limitations to conduct innovative research within the university. He finally explains some of his key ideas about the ways in which drug policies and interventions resemble religious wars and crusades, his growing disenchantment with present developments at European level, and he reflects on the future of drugs commenting on the present attempts to regulate cannabis.


dr. Damián Zaitch
Dr. Damián Zaitch is universitair docent bij de Willem Pompe Instituut voor Strafrechtswetenschappen, Universiteit Utrecht. Hij onderzoekt en publiceert over drugshandel, drugsbeleid en georganiseerde misdaad in Nederland en Latijns-Amerika, en over diverse vormen van transnationale misdaad, globale criminele markten, en organisatiecriminaliteit.

prof. Dr. Tom Decorte
Prof. dr. Tom Decorte is antropoloog en hoogleraar criminologie aan de Universiteit Gent, en directeur van het Instituut voor Sociaal Drugsonderzoek (ISD). Hij publiceert geregeld over drugsbeleid, cannabisteelt, en drugsgebruik.
Artikel

Advocatuur in strafrecht en herstelrecht

Een verkenning van de verschillen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden raadsman, herstelprocesrecht, Strafprocesrecht, advocaten, mediation
Auteurs John Blad
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The author first describes the deontological axioma for the role of the defense counsel in the domain of criminal procedure. Since here the most serious charges are brought against a suspect, who may have all his life-perspectives to lose by severe punishments, the duty of the legal counsel is to be as one-sided in the defense of his clients views and interests as possible and as allowed by professional ethics. He is the guardian of the legitimate interests of the suspect in the context of a legal battle in or out of court about the legal truth of what is said to have happened. In view of the ideals of restorative justice (illustrated by references to Nils Christies Conflicts as property) a new set of rules and customs should be developed that can function as a framework of ‘restorative procedural law’. In the context of restorative justice legal counsel of both the suspect and the victim should be expected and able to function much more as ‘restorative coaches’, seeking co-operation and deliberation between all stakeholders. But, should clients – suspects and victims alike – decide against such an approach and want ‘their day in court’ this should also be possible and be realised. The independent courts should always remain the ultimate refuge for those seeking justice.


John Blad
John Blad is redacteur van dit tijdschrift, auteur en consulent op het gebied van herstelrecht. Naast andere publicaties schreef hij samen met David Cornwell en Martin Wright Civilising Criminal Justice, Waterside Press (2013). In 2015 viel hem de Herman Bianchi herstelrecht-prijs ten deel.
Diversen

In memoriam Herman Bianchi

(Rotterdam, 14 december 1924 – Leeuwarden, 30 december 2015)

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 1 2016
Auteurs Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen
Auteursinformatie

Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen
Prof. dr. R. van Swaaningen is als hoogleraar internationaal comparatieve criminologie verbonden aan de Erasmus School of Law.
Artikel

Actief burgerschap binnen herstelrecht

Een inventarisatie van participatievormen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 3 2011
Trefwoorden Citizenship, Participation, Mediators, Activism
Auteurs Brunilda Pali
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Seemingly a difficult concept, participation in restorative justice can be understood better once the notion is broadened and operationalized. Therefore a proposal will be made here to first broaden the meaning of participation beyond participation of stakeholders and ‘community’ in the process as it is generally understood in restorative justice literature, and second break down the concept of participation into five different levels: (1) involvement of the stakeholders and the ‘community’ in the restorative process; (2) participation of citizens as volunteer mediators/facilitators in the process; (3) self-referrals from citizens; (4) voluntary participation of experts in restorative justice organisations; (5) promotion from ex-victims of crime and ex-offenders. Based on this approach, in the end, the author opens up the discussion on the meaning of active citizenship for restorative justice in continental Europe. Before discussing how the broadening of the concept of participation is concretely envisioned, the author argues on the importance of prioritizing the notion of citizenship instead of ‘community’ in the continental European restorative justice discourse.


Brunilda Pali
Brunilda Pali verricht promotieonderzoek aan het Instituut voor Criminologie van de Katholieke Universiteit van Leuven.
Artikel

Het herstelrechtelijk ongeloof in het concept bestraffing

Een verkenning op basis van het ‘last resort’-principe

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 3 2010
Trefwoorden bestraffing, abolitionisme, last resort, criminele gedragingen, leedtoevoeging
Auteurs Vicky De Mesmaecker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Discussions in the movement of restorative justice about the fundamental question, whether its interventions are alternatives to punishment or alternative punishments, have become repetitive and seem to be in a dead end. The author reviews the arguments against the background of the ‘last resort’ principle in Husak’s work. Husak distinguishes between last resort in terms of sentencing and last resort in terms of criminalization. Since the restorative justice movement does not fundamentally reject the primary criminalisations, but accepts the definitions of certain forms of conduct as crime, it merely strives to offer alternatives to punishments that would otherwise be imposed. If protagonists of restorative justice want to avoid this, they should consider an abolitionist option to strive for decriminalization.


Vicky De Mesmaecker
Vicky De Mesmaecker is werkzaam aan het Leuvens Instituut voor Criminologie, K.U.Leuven.
Artikel

De maximalistische visie op herstelrecht onder vuur

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 1 2010
Trefwoorden maximalisme, rechtsorde, slachtoffers, rehabilitatie
Auteurs Lode Walgrave
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The authors latest book on Restorative Justice, Self-Interest and Responsible Citizenship has been discussed in this journal in 2009 and the author now responds to the critiques, which came from three jurists and therefore had a predominantly juristic character. Themes discussed are ‘criminal justice and punishment’, ‘restorative justice and the law’, ‘restorative justice, the victim and public interest’, ‘restorative justice and the legal order’ and finally ‘restorative justice and offender rehabilitation’. Walgrave maintains and clarifies the views he developed in the book explaining why it is correct to claim that criminal justice can be identified as fundamentally punitive (although it does not always punish, as one critic has observed) and that it should be possible to elaborate restorative justice into a completely new legal system, offering legal guarantees fitting to what restorative justice is trying to achieve. Legal guarantees as they exist today in criminal procedure cannot be taken as the benchmark for restorative procedures in view of the totally different aims and procedures. Furthermore, it is not true that the victim gets too much power in restorative justice – as one critic stated – because restorative justice is and should be conceived as a system of public law, involving the legal agencies and authorities such as courts in a proper role as guardians of every citizin’s dominion. It is because of the safeguarding of dominion that the victim should have a key-role to play in restorative justice, although not obliged to participate.One critic has mentioned that Walgraves ideas seem to imply that the legal order is only something being imposed upon the citizens ‘top down’, while in many respects one could maintain that the law and the principles of the legal order have been produced ‘bottom-up’ or at least should be the result of democracy. The response is that restorative procedures offer more opportunities for citizens for this democratic participation in producing the norms of the law.Finally some have argued that the rehabilitative interests of the offender should have a more central place in the definition of restorative justice, more or less of the same importance as restoring the harms of the victim. Walgraves experiences with the Belgian model of juvenile protection made him cautious of the risks of doing so, not only in terms of serving the victims needs, but also in terms of the legal protection of the juvenile offender against arbitrary interventions.


Lode Walgrave
Lode Walgrave is emeritus hoogleraar jeugdcriminologie van de Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
Titel

Zelfregulering door ondernemingen: Ontwikkeling, beoordeling en bange voorgevoelens

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 02 2008
Trefwoorden Zelfregulering, Bestuurder, Toezichthouder, Compliance, Toezicht, Handhaving, Aansprakelijkheid, E-business, Ondernemingsactiviteit, Personeel
Auteurs Shover, N.

Shover, N.
Discussie

Herstelrecht, eigenbelang en verantwoord burgerschap

Enkele reacties op het boek met dezelfde titel van Lode Walgrave

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 3 2009
Auteurs John Blad
Auteursinformatie

John Blad
John Blad is hoofddocent strafrechtswetenschappen aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en redactielid van dit tijdschrift.

Drs. Ed. Leuw
Drs. E. Leuw is voormalig onderzoeker, Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum (WODC), Den Haag. eleuw@chello.nl.
Artikel

De ontwikkeling van criminologisch onderzoek voor beleid en praktijk

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 2 2009
Trefwoorden beleidsgerichte criminologie, professionele criminologie, WODC
Auteurs Prof. dr. mr. Bert Niemeijer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article first addresses the tension between scientific requirements and policy oriented criminological research. The article then proceeds to describe the historical development of policy oriented criminology in the Netherlands. This narrative can be divided into three phases: early history, the years 1980-1995 and the period from 1995. Criminology in the Netherlands has always had and retains a strong policy orientation. The growth of professional (academic) criminology is a relatively recent phenomenon. ‘Critical’ and ‘public’ criminology always have been and remain the work of individuals. The development of policy oriented criminological research in the Netherlands appears dependent on governmental involvement. The situations in Belgium and the USA give the same impression.


Prof. dr. mr. Bert Niemeijer
Prof. dr. mr. E. Niemeijer is bijzonder hoogleraar rechtssociologie, faculteit rechtsgeleerdheid, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam en coördinator strategieontwikkeling, Ministerie van Justitie, e.niemeijer@rechten.vu.nl.
Artikel

Gacaca in postconflict Rwanda

De zoektocht naar verzoening en gerechtigheid

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 1 2009
Trefwoorden Gacaca, Rwanda, genocide, verzoening, gerechtigheid
Auteurs Drs. Hester Baboelal-Bosman
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Based on a prize-winning master thesis in criminology, this article describes how the Rwandan Government chose to bring to justice all suspects of (crimes during) the 1994 genocide. Accordingly, it was decided to turn to Gacaca, the traditional Rwandan method of dispute resolution, in order to reach reconciliation as well as justice. A field study indicates that, when asked whether they think Gacaca can lead to reconciliation and justice, the majority of Rwandans think it can. However, six determinants of reconciliation have been deduced from the interviews. Because Gacaca can only have a clear positive impact on one of these factors – the need to meet – Gacaca can not be considered as an appropriate mechanism to achieve reconciliation in Rwanda. It also appears that justice is not a determinant for reconciliation.


Drs. Hester Baboelal-Bosman
Drs. H. Baboelal-Bosman, winnares van de NVK scriptieprijs 2008, studeerde criminologie aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, hesterbosman@upcmail.nl.
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 drie verschillende filters: tijdschrift, rubriek en jaar.