Search result: 485 articles

x
Article

Access_open Is de vrijheid van godsdienst in de moderne multiculturele samenleving nog een hanteerbaar recht?

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 2 2010
Keywords freedom of religion, human rights, human dignity, traditional religion, unequal treatment
Authors Koo van der Wal
AbstractAuthor's information

    There are two fundamental problems with regard to the freedom of religion. The first concerns the content and scope of the right; the second, a possible unequal treatment between population groups. The first problem can only be dealt with by a preliminary analysis of the religious phenomenon, which precedes a legal definition. It turns out that there is a range of different types of religion, with on the one hand traditional forms of religion which are narrowly interwoven with the culture in question (all kinds of ‘cultural’ practices possessing a religious dimension), and on the other forms of religion which loosen to a considerable extent the ties between culture and religion. Evidently, the former types of religion cause problems in modern society. An additional problem is that freedom of religion as a modern basic right rests on a view of human being – including the idea of the inherent dignity and autonomy of the human person – which is at odds with the symbolic universe of traditional religion. The conclusion of the article is that in the modern pluralist society freedom of religion is on its way to becoming, or already has become, an unmanageable right. So the problems arising around this right (including that of unequal treatment) can only be solved in a pragmatic, not really satisfactory way. In that context, modern humanitarian standards should be observed in the implementation of the right of freedom of religion because fundamental human rights are connected with a specific concept of humanity.


Koo van der Wal
Koo van der Wal is emeritus professor of Philosophy at the University of Amsterdam and the Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Book Review

Access_open Marc de Wilde, Verwantschap in extremen

Politieke theologie bij Walter Benjamin en Carl Schmitt

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 2 2010
Authors Jerker Spits
AbstractAuthor's information

    Jerker Spits, book review of Marc de Wilde, Verwantschap in extremen. Politieke theologie bij Walter Benjamin en Carl Schmitt


Jerker Spits
Jerker Spits, PhD at Leiden University, publications on German literature (Ernst Jünger, Thomas Bernhard, Martin Walser) and philosophy in Oxford German Studies, Monatshefte and Academische Boekengids.

    Bertjan Wolthuis’ book review of Luuk van Middelaar, De passage naar Europa. Geschiedenis van een begin


Bertjan Wolthuis
Bertjan Wolthuis is assistant professor at the Department of Legal Theory, VU University Amsterdam
Book Review

Access_open B.C. van Beers, Persoon en lichaam in het recht

Menselijke waardigheid en zelfbeschikking in het tijdperk van de medische biotechnologie

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 2 2010
Authors Martin Buijsen
AbstractAuthor's information

    Martin Buijsen’s book review of B.C. van Beers, Persoon en lichaam in het recht. Menselijke waardigheid en zelfbeschikking in het tijdperk van de medische biotechnologie


Martin Buijsen
Martin Buijsen is professor of Health Law at Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Book Review

Access_open Wilbert Mennings, Wouter Veraart en Pieter Edelman (red.), Voorlopig ben ik humanist

Teksten en voordrachten van Jan van Zijverden (1928-2003)

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 2 2010
Authors Jaap Zwart and Femke Storm
AbstractAuthor's information

    Jaap Zwart and Femke Storm, book review of Wilbert Mennings, Wouter Veraart en Pieter Edelman (red.), Voorlopig ben ik humanist. Teksten en voordrachten van Jan van Zijverden (1928-2003)


Jaap Zwart
Jaap Zwart is lecturer at the Department of Legal Theory, VU University Amsterdam.

Femke Storm
Femke Storm is a law student at the VU University Amsterdam.
Article

Access_open Constitutionele toetsing in een democratie zonder volk

Een kelseniaanse rechtvaardiging voor het Europees Hof van Justitie

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 2 2010
Keywords Kelsen, Democracy, Legitimacy, European Union, European Court of Justice
Authors Quoc Loc Hong
AbstractAuthor's information

    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.
Article

Access_open De droom van Beccaria

Over het strafrecht en de nodale veiligheidszorg

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 2 2010
Keywords Beccaria, criminal law, nodal governance, social contract
Authors Klaas Rozemond
AbstractAuthor's information

    Les Johnston and Clifford Shearing argue in their book, Governing Security, that the state has lost its monopoly on the governance of security. Private security arrangements have formed a networked governance of security in which the criminal law of the state is just one of the many knots or ‘nodes’ of the security network. Johnston and Shearing consider On Crimes and Punishment, written by Cesare Beccaria in the 18th century, as the most important statement of the classical security program which has withered away in the networked governance of the risk society. This article critizes the way Johnston and Shearing analyze Beccaria’s social contract theory and it formulates a Beccarian theory of the criminal law and nodal governance which explains the causes of crime and the rise of nodal governance and defends the central role of the state in anchoring security arrangements based on private contracts and property rights.


Klaas Rozemond
Klaas Rozemond is associate professor at the Department of Criminal Law, Faculty of Law, VU University Amsterdam.

    “Het waren mijn genen, edelachtbare, niet ik” kopte NRC Handelsblad van donderdag 5 november 2009.1xFolkert Jensma, “Het waren mijn genen, edelachtbare, niet ik”, NRC Handelsblad, 5 november 2009. Het artikel bericht over een Italiaanse rechtszaak waarin in hoger beroep de straf die aan een moordenaar werd opgelegd, werd verlaagd van twaalf naar negen jaar. De raadsheer nam deze beslissing, aldus de verslaggever, nadat twee neurowetenschappers van de universiteiten van Pisa en Padua op een hersenscan onregelmatigheden hadden aangetoond en bovendien afwijkingen waren gevonden in het MAOA-gen, dat ook wel bekendstaat als het ‘agressiegen’.

Noten

  • 1 Folkert Jensma, “Het waren mijn genen, edelachtbare, niet ik”, NRC Handelsblad, 5 november 2009.


Anne Ruth Mackor
Anne Ruth Mackor is professor of professional ethics, in particular of the legal professions, at the Faculty of Law of Groningen, and Socrates professor of professional ethics at the Faculties of Philosophy and Theology of Groningen.

    Arend Soeteman, book review of Jan Smits, Omstreden rechtswetenschap, Over aard, methode en organisatie van de juridische discipline


Arend Soeteman
Arend Soeteman is professor of law at the Faculty of Law, VU University Amsterdam.

    Peter van Schilfgaarde, book review of Amartya Sen, The Idea of Justice


Peter van Schilfgaarde
Peter van Schilfgaarde is emeritus professor of corporate law at the law faculties of Utrecht University and the University of Groningen and currently publishes in the field of legal theory.

    Thom Holterman, book review of Jacques Langlois, Misère du droit.


Thom Holterman
Thom Holterman is Doctor of Laws and lives in Urciers, France.
Article

Access_open Paul Scholten en Herman Dooyeweerd: het gesprek dat nooit plaatsvond

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 1 2010
Keywords Scholten, Dooyeweerd, legal principles, legal reasoning, religion
Authors Bas Hengstmengel
AbstractAuthor's information

    The legal scholars Paul Scholten (1875-1946) and Herman Dooyeweerd (1894-1977) had much in common. The most significant agreement is their emphasis on the influence of a (religious) worldview on legal scholarship and practice. Unfortunately, they never met to discuss the similarities and differences of their jurisprudential ideas. In this article I try to reconstruct this conversation which never took place. Scholten’s legal thought is specifically oriented to the practice and difficulties of judging. Dooyeweerd above all was a philosopher whose specific philosophy of the modal aspects of reality is the basis for his thinking about the law. Both scholars emphasized the importance of legal principles. They also identified several fundamental legal categories and concepts. However, their methodology is different. The way religion and morality influence their legal thought is also different. A discussion of the contemporary relevance of their work completes the paper.


Bas Hengstmengel
Bas Hengstmengel is a PhD-candidate at Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam. He writes a dissertation on procedural justice.
Miscellaneous

Access_open Everything we do is tentative. An interview with Prof. Frederick Schauer

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 1 2010
Keywords Schauer, rule priority, legal principles, legal positivism, generality
Authors Bo Zhao
AbstractAuthor's information

    Professor Schauer covers many topics in this interview. On a general note, the interview covers themes pertaining to his experience in engaging with legal philosophy as a trained lawyer; his views on the present and the future of legal philosophy and how we shall cope with its development; his new book Thinking like a Lawyer; the role of legal philosophers in law and society; and some sincere suggestions to young legal philosophers. It also covers more specific topics, including discussions about his insistence on rule priority; differences between legal principles and rules; his opinion of legal positivism; and the pros and cons of analytical tools like spectrum, continuum and generality.


Bo Zhao
Bo Zhao is a post-doc researcher at the History Department, Faculty of Arts, and the Legal Theory Department, Faculty of Law, University of Groningen.
Article

Access_open ‘Wat is waarheid?’ De rol van deskundigen bij waarheidsvinding in de strafrechtspraak

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 1 2010
Keywords Legitimation durch Verfahren, criminal law, expert-witnesses, truth, reliability of evidence
Authors Anne Ruth Mackor
AbstractAuthor's information

    Huls has argued that the idea that judges are truth-finders is misleading. In the first part of the paper I put his claim to the test. Against Huls I argue that the aim of procedures in criminal lawsuits is not only to guarantee binding decisions but also to help to find the truth. In the second part of the paper I investigate the role expert-witnesses play in truth-finding. Cleiren and Loth have argued that experts fail to understand the differences between legal and scientific ways of truth-finding. It turns out that Cleiren does not offer an argument for her claim and that Loth’s claim fails too, since it confuses coherence as truth and coherence as epistemic justification. I conclude that legal scholars, rather than experts, fail to understand the nature of legal and scientific truth-finding.


Anne Ruth Mackor
Anne Ruth Mackor is professor of professional ethics, in particular of the legal professions, at the Faculty of Law of Groningen, and Socrates professor of professional ethics at the Faculties of Philosophy and Theology of Groningen.
Article

Access_open Slapende rechters, dwalende rechtspsychologen en het hypothetische karakter van feitelijke oordelen

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 1 2010
Keywords psychology of law, criminal law, miscarriages of justice, hypothetical reasoning
Authors Klaas Rozemond
AbstractAuthor's information

    In their book De slapende rechter (The sleeping judge) Dutch legal psychologists W.A. Wagenaar, H. Israëls and P.J. van Koppen claim that Dutch judges wrongfully convict suspects in certain cases because these judges generally fail to understand the way hypothetical reasoning works in relation to empirical evidence. This article argues that Wagenaar, Israëls and Van Koppen are basically right in their claim that reasoning on evidence in criminal cases should have the form of hypothetical reasoning. However, they fail to apply this form of reasoning to their own analysis of Dutch criminal cases and the causes of wrongful convictions. Therefore, their conclusion that a form of revision of convictions outside of the criminal law system should be introduced does not meet their own methodological standards.


Klaas Rozemond
Klaas Rozemond is associate professor at the Department of Criminal Law, Faculty of Law, VU University Amsterdam.
Book Review

Access_open Hans Lindahl (red.), A Right to Inclusion and Exclusion.

Normative Fault Lines of the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 1 2010
Authors Machiel Karskens
AbstractAuthor's information

    Machiel Karskens, book review of Hans Lindahl (red.), A Right to Inclusion and Exclusion. Normative Fault Lines of the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice


Machiel Karskens
Machiel Karskens is professor of social and political philosophy at the Faculty of Philosophy, Radboud University Nijmegen.

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, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
Book Review

Access_open Pierre Legendre, L’autre bible de l’occident

Le monument romano-canonique, Étude sur l’architecture dogmatique des sociétés, Leçons IX

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 2 2010
Authors Thom Holterman
AbstractAuthor's information

    Thom Holterman’s book review of Pierre Legendre, L’autre bible de l’occident: le Monument romano-canonique, Étude sur l’architecture dogmatique des sociétés, Leçons IX


Thom Holterman
Thom Holterman is Doctor of Laws and lives in Urciers, France.
Article

Access_open Wetenschappelijke rechtsgeleerdheid

Commentaar op het preadvies van Carel Smith

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 3 2009
Keywords law and hermeneutics, law and normativity, one right answer thesis, legal jurisprudence, legal doctrine
Authors Prof. dr. Arend Soeteman
AbstractAuthor's information

    This article is a comment on Carel Smith’s paper. Smith rightly argues that the study of law has a hermeneutic character. But his interpretation of legal hermeneutics includes the thesis that in hard cases there is no right or true legal decision. This seems to have negative implications for the scholarly character of the study of law: in hard cases any solution goes. This paper argues, against Smith, that the study of law defends right answers for hard cases. It is also normative in another sense: legal answers, in easy cases as well as in hard cases, always presuppose a normative interpretation of the legal sources. This contributes to the differences of opinion under lawyers. But it is no obstacle to the scholarly character of the study of law, as long as a rational debate about these legal answers and the underlying values and principles is possible. Smith’s rejection of the right answer thesis, however, prevents the possibility of such a rational debate.


Prof. dr. Arend Soeteman
Arend Soeteman is professor at the Faculty of Law, VU University Amsterdam.
Book Review

Access_open Gerard Drosterij, Politics as jurisdiction: a new understanding of public and private in political theory

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 3 2009
Keywords public, private, adjudication, methodic individualism
Authors Prof. mr. Herman van Gunsteren
AbstractAuthor's information

    Herman van Gunsteren, book review of Gerard Drosterij, Politics as jurisdiction: a new understanding of public and private in political theory. Muiderberg: Eberson, 2008


Prof. mr. Herman van Gunsteren
Herman van Gunsteren is professor emeritus of Political and Legal Philosophy at Leiden University.
Showing 201 - 220 of 485 found texts
1 2 7 8 9 11 13 14 15 24 25
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.