Zoekresultaat: 8 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid x
Artikel

De digitale schandpaal: opsporingsberichtgeving in een gedigitaliseerde samenleving

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden DIY-policing, online policing, wanted notices, right to privacy, procedural defect
Auteurs Gabry Vanderveen en Mojan Samadi
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the context of criminal investigations police and prosecution can appeal to the public for information to further their case. This decision cannot be taken lightly and requires a balancing exercise between the rights of the suspect (and other people involved), specifically the right to privacy, the interest of criminal investigations, such as the identification of the suspect or witnesses, and public pressure to fight crime.
    In the current digital society, the prosecutor can choose between a wide range of (new) media and modes of communication to ask for information. Next to wanted notices on paper posters and broadcasts on television, appeals for information are published on websites, social media platforms, apps and digital screens. Citizens can modify and share these appeals and they can comment on them. This necessitates careful consideration by the prosecutor on whether and how to appeal for information. After all, these appeals could lead to DIY-policing or online vigilantism (digilantism), leading to infringements on the right to privacy and even possibly to misidentification of suspects.
    This article contributes to the continuing debate. We describe the legal framework the prosecution has to take into account in such cases. The importance of a considered decision is illustrated by three cases in which judicial authorities appealed to the public for help in the criminal investigations, resulting in massive (media) attention and consequently affecting the eventual criminal case against the defendants. In two of these cases the prosecutorial decision to involve the public’s help resulted in a violation of the defendants’ rights to privacy and consequently had to be remedied by the court. Both cases led to social, legal and political debate about the balance between privacy and crime control.


Gabry Vanderveen
Gabry N.G. Vanderveen is als universitair docent verbonden aan de sectie Criminologie, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Email: vanderveen@law.eur.nl.

Mojan Samadi
Mojan Samadi is als promovendus straf(proces)recht verbonden aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden. Email: m.samadi@law.leidenuniv.nl.
Artikel

Access_open Online vergaren van informatie voor opsporingsonderzoek

Een beknopte evaluatie van voorgestelde wetgeving

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden opsporingsbevoegdheden, digitalisering, Politie
Auteurs Wouter Stol en Litska Strikwerda
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Dutch Police Act provides the police with the legal power to gather information about a person on the internet as long as this does not cause more than ‘a limited violation of privacy’. If the police are gathering more information about a person they need a special legal power laid down in the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure. The dividing line between ‘a limited violation of privacy’ and ‘more than a limited violation of privacy’ is not always clear. The legislator is preparing a new piece of legislation to provide the police with more clarity. This article discusses the suggested law article with respect to the gathering of information from open sources. Furthermore, this article suggests to not only regulate the amount of information the police are gathering but also the kind of tools that the police use (simple search machine versus an advanced web crawler).


Wouter Stol
Wouter Stol is lector Cybersafety aan de NHL Stenden Hogeschool en de Politieacademie, en bijzonder hoogleraar Politiestudies aan de Open Universiteit. Email: wstol@planet.nl.

Litska Strikwerda
Litska Strikwerda is Universitair Docent Metajuridica aan de Open Universiteit. Email: litska.strikwerda@ou.nl.
Artikel

Veilig uitgaan: tegenstrijdige gevoelens over inzet politie en andere maatregelen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden tegenstrijdigheden, assemblage, angst voor criminaliteit, uitgaansgebieden, veiligheidsbeleving
Auteurs Jelle Brands en Irina van Aalst
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Urban nightlife areas are widely renowned for their emotionally charged nature, affording greater opportunities for transgressions of social norms compared to daytime contexts. Yet, the ways nightlife consumers experience safety in the public spaces of nightlife areas has received limited attention in the academic literatures. This article approaches experienced safety in the public spaces of nightlife areas as emerging from encounters between human and non-human (material, social, cultural) elements grounded in time and space. Such elements include the characteristics of the built environment, the design of public space, police presence, lighting and also first and secondhand experiences and popular media discourses more generally. We hypothesized that encounters between such elements necessarily renders some ambiguity in experienced safety, in the sense that the effect of a particular element on experienced safety is always coproduced in the unfolding encounter. By drawing on a series of interviews with Dutch students in Utrecht, various types of ambiguity are shown to exist depending on both the particularities of the situation at hand and based on differences between individual circumstance and life course. Ambiguity is also shown to exist in the sense that mentioned elements may both comfort and alarm participants at the same time. Our findings infer that we should implement ‘safer nightlife’ initiatives that are tailored to particular contexts, situations and publics. The results also suggest that current interventions seeking to stimulate safety in urban nightlife settings might not be as successful in reducing/enhancing (un)safety as (popular) policy and media discourses have suggested.


Jelle Brands
Jelle Brands is universitair docent aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid aan de Universiteit Leiden.

Irina van Aalst
Irina van Aalst is universitair docent aan het departement Sociale Geografie en Planologie van de Faculteit Geowetenschappen, Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

Politieonderzoek in open bronnen op internet

Strafvorderlijke aspecten

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Trefwoorden criminal investigation, surveillance, OSINT, investigation powers, legal basis
Auteurs Bert-Jaap Koops
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Analysing large amounts of data goes to the heart of the challenges confronting intelligence and law enforcement professionals today. Increasingly, this involves Internet data that are ‘open source’ or ‘publicly available’. Projects such as the European FP7 VIRTUOSO aim at developing platforms for open-source intelligence by law enforcement and public security, which open up opportunities for large-scale, automated data gathering and analysis. However, the mere fact that data are publicly available does not imply an absence of restrictions to researching them. This paper investigates one area of legal constraints, namely Dutch criminal-procedure law in relation to open-source data gathering by the police. Which legal basis is there for this activity? And under what conditions can foreign open sources be investigated?
    After sketching the context of the VIRTUOSO project and legal constraints of open-source intelligence in general, this paper discusses provisions of the Dutch Police Act 1993 and the Code of Criminal Procedure to determine which is the correct legal basis for gathering data from openly accessible and semi-open sources. Next, cross-border gathering of data is discussed on the basis of article 32 of the Cybercrime Convention. The paper draws the conclusion that investigating open sources by the police will often go beyond what is allowed on the basis of the general task description of the police (art. 2 Police Act 1993); hence, an order from the Public Prosecutor for systematic observation or intelligence is required. Moreover, the tools used must meet the non-manipulability and auditing requirements of the Dutch Decree on Technical Devices in Criminal Procedure.


Bert-Jaap Koops
Prof. dr. Bert-Jaap Koops is hoogleraar regulering van technologie bij TILT – Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society, Universiteit van Tilburg. Het onderzoek voor dit artikel werd mede gefinancierd door het Europese KP7-project VIRTUOSO (projectnr. FP7-SEC GA-2009-242352).
Redactioneel

Redactioneel

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Joyce Kerstens, Leontien M. van der Knaap en Ralf Beerens
Auteursinformatie

Joyce Kerstens
Drs. J.W.M. (Joyce) Kerstens is Projectleider Jeugd & Cybersafety bij het Lectoraat Cybersafety van NHL Hogeschool en Politieacademie.E-mail: j.kerstens@nhl.nl

Leontien M. van der Knaap
Dr. L.M. (Leontien M.) van der Knaap is universitair hoofddocent aan het Instituut Bestuurskunde, Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen, Universiteit Leiden. E-mail: L.M.vdrKnaap@uvt.nl

Ralf Beerens
R. (Ralf) Beerens Ph.D is onderzoeker bij het Nederlands Instituut Fysieke Veiligheid (NIFV) en promovendus aan de Universiteit van Lund, Zweden. E-mail: ralf.beerens@nifv.nl
Artikel

Gekocht, maar niet gekregen

Slachtofferschap van online oplichting nader onderzocht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 4 2010
Trefwoorden Online oplichting, Slachtofferschap, Slachtofferenquête, Lage zelfcontrole
Auteurs Johan van Wilsem
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Consumer fraud seems to be widespread, yet little research is devoted to understanding why certain social groups are more vulnerable to this type of victimization than others. The present paper deals with internet consumer fraud victimization, and uses an explanatory model that combines insights from self control theory and routine activity theory. The results from large-scale victimization survey data among the Dutch general population (N=6,201) reveal that people with low self-control run substantially higher victimization risk, as well as people performing ‘risky’ routine activities, such as online shopping and participation in online forums. Though a minority share of the self-control-victimization link is indirect – because people with low self-control are more involved in risk-enhancing routine activities – a large direct effect on internet fraud victimization remains. This suggests that, within similar situations, people with poor impulse control respond differently to deceptive online commercial offers.


Johan van Wilsem
Dr. Johan van Wilsem is werkzaam als universitair docent Criminologie aan de Universiteit Leiden, Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie. Contactadres: postbus 9520, 2300 RA Leiden. Tel. 071-5277418. E-mail: J.A.van.Wilsem@law.leidenuniv.nl.
Artikel

De Collectieve Winkelontzegging

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 2 2009
Trefwoorden winkelontzegging, overlast, (on)veiligheid, voorzorgsprincipe
Auteurs Loes Wesselink, Marc Schuilenburg en Patrick Van Calster
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Public Private Partnerships (PPS) are becoming one of the most popular answers to problems of crime and disorder. In this contribution, the authors research the Collective Shop Ban, maybe the most successful form of Public Private Partnerships currently operating in the Netherlands. A Collective Shop Ban is a civil measure bestowed upon a person by the shop owner, when s/he displays ‘unwanted behaviour’. As a consequence entry can be denied for every shop assembled in the association of entrepreneurs. In 2007 almost 900 people have been denied access to over 450 shops in the city centre of The Hague. This new form of collaboration between police, public prosecution service and entrepreneurs has already been rewarded with the Regional Crime Control Platform ‘safety award’. However, the authors question the effects of this collaboration. They argue that the Collective Shop Ban creates its own public of ‘unwanted shoppers’, that can be banned from a shopping area by devising new terms of exclusion. This ‘public’ is subjected to new means of power, to be applied by private security guards and shop owners. While entrepreneurs celebrate the possibilities of this civil measure, the authors warn for the juridical and ethical consequences of this measure.


Loes Wesselink
Loes Wesselink is criminologe en werkt als junior onderzoeker bij het COT Instituut voor Veiligheids- en Crisismanagement in Den Haag. E-mail: wesselink.loes@gmail.com.

Marc Schuilenburg
Marc Schuilenburg doceert aan de vakgroep Criminologie van de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam. E-mail: m.b.schuilenburg@rechten.vu.nl.

Patrick Van Calster
Patrick Van Calster is universitair hoofddocent aan het departement strafrecht en criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden. E-mail: p.j.v..van.calster@law.leidenuniv.nl.
Artikel

De Collectieve Winkelontzegging

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1 2009
Trefwoorden winkelontzegging, overlast, (on)veiligheid, voorzorgsprincipe
Auteurs Loes Wesselink, Marc Schuilenburg en Patrick Van Calster
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Public Private Partnerships (PPS) are becoming one of the most popular answers to problems of crime and disorder. In this contribution, the authors research the Collective Shop Ban, maybe the most successful form of Public Private Partnerships currently operating in the Netherlands. A Collective Shop Ban is a civil measure bestowed upon a person by the shop owner, when s/he displays ‘unwanted behaviour’. As a consequence entry can be denied for every shop assembled in the association of entrepreneurs. In 2007 almost 900 people have been denied access to over 450 shops in the city centre of The Hague. This new form of collaboration between police, public prosecution service and entrepreneurs has already been rewarded with the Regional Crime Control Platform ‘safety award’. However, the authors question the effects of this collaboration. They argue that the Collective Shop Ban creates its own public of ‘unwanted shoppers’, that can be banned from a shopping area by devising new terms of exclusion. This ‘public’ is subjected to new means of power, to be applied by private security guards and shop owners. While entrepreneurs celebrate the possibilities of this civil measure, the authors warn for the juridical and ethical consequences of this measure.


Loes Wesselink
Loes Wesselink is criminologe en werkt als junior onderzoeker-adviseur bij het COT Instituut voor Veiligheids- en Crisismanagement in Den Haag.E-,mail: wesselink.loes@gmail.com

Marc Schuilenburg
Marc Schuilenburg doceert aan de vakgroep Criminologie van de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam. E-mail: m.b.schuilenburg@rechten.vu.nl.

Patrick Van Calster
Patrick Van Calster is universitair hoofddocent aan het departement strafrecht en criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden.E-mail: p.j.v.van.calster@law.leidenuniv.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.