Search

Contains fulltext : 289314.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) 21 p.

Contains fulltext : 291607.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) 7 p.

Item does not contain fulltext 7 p.

Contains fulltext : 291593.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 22 p.

Contains fulltext : 251942.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) 18 p.

Contains fulltext : 286282.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 6 p.

Item does not contain fulltext 8 p.

Contains fulltext : 282237.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 17 p.

The effective return of irregularly staying migrants is identified as an overriding objective in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, while return operations are the fastest-growing activity of Frontex. Since the 2019 amendment of its Regulation, the agency has received a significant augmentation of its mandate and capacity in pre-return and return-related activities. This way, Frontex takes a centre-stage role in the Commission’s plan to intensify returns. This article fills the relevant gap in existing literature, updating our knowledge on the latest legislative developments in EU return operations and answering questions related to their human rights implications at a time when the scrutiny over Frontex is at its peak. The article discusses the human rights risks of these operations and the effectiveness of the available safeguards. This article is the product mainly of legal doctrinal research, i.e. the analysis of the relevant EU law and legal literature, along with civil society and institutional reports and other empirical documentation. At the same time, it also looks at quantitative data on the agency’s return activities from 2004 until 2019.

Contains fulltext : 283777.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) 21 p.

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 290345.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) 6 p.

Contains fulltext : 292417.pdf (Author’s version postprint ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 290446.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Contains fulltext : 293368.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 205 p.

Contains fulltext : 293158.pdf (Author’s version preprint ) (Closed access) Contains fulltext : 293158.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 289869.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 291587.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 9 p.

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 291608.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 2 p.

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 238497.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 3 p.

Contains fulltext : 238852.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) 8 p.

Item does not contain fulltext 7 p.

Contains fulltext : 241945.pdf (Author’s version preprint ) (Open Access) 23 p.

Contains fulltext : 245670.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) C. Bijleveld Nederlandse Encyclopedie Empirical Legal Studies Den Haag:Boom juridisch ,2020 9789462908369

Contains fulltext : 239572.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 6 p.

Contains fulltext : 238671.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 13 p.

Contains fulltext : 238621.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 5 p.

Contains fulltext : 242226.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 12 p.

Several countries have introduced mandatory higher education for all police officers. However, we have scant empirical knowledge about the arguments and debates underlying these systems. This contribution unpacks the ‘politics of higher police education’ in Norway, Finland, and North Rhine-Westphalia. We discuss the circumstances and dominant actors’ views, expectations, and arguments involved in the introduction and evolution of higher police education, and how to understand similarities and differences between these three countries. We find that similar arguments recurred in each case: helping the police adapt to a changing society, making the police profession more attractive, preventing police education from lagging behind similar professions, and improving police–citizen relationships. Specific historical or political contexts and organizational arrangements also played important roles in the introduction and shaping of higher police education. The higher police education systems as such are seen as legitimate, but there are fierce ongoing debates on both substance and form.

European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2020 5(2), 745-754, I. Introduction. - II. Evolving legal questions surrounding Art. 267 TFEU. - III. Stocktaking: the procedure under pressure? - IV. Contributing to the academic debate. - V. Overview of the Special Section. - V.1. Factors and motives to refer. - V.2. Quality of Court of Justice answers and dialogue. - V.3. Implementation of Court of Justice judgments., The most important procedure of EU law is the preliminary ruling procedure. Academic scrutiny by way of a Special Section is pertinent for three reasons. Firstly, there are still many out-standing legal and practical questions with respect to Art. 267 TFEU as illustrated by the continuous flow of new judgments of the Court of Justice and European Court of Human Rights. Secondly, there are growing allegations that (some) national court judges are dissatisfied with the procedure, their interaction with the Court of Justice and the resulting answers. Thirdly, there has been little (empirical) research into the effective functioning of the procedure and its application by national courts. The Articles of this Special Section examine - often in an empirical way on the basis of interviews or questionnaires - why national courts refer (or not), what they think of their interaction with the Court of Justice and whether and how they implement the answers of the Court of Justice.

The Dutch legislature has recently (2012) altered the legislation for post-conviction revision of criminal cases. The legislature aimed to improve the balance between the competing interests of individual justice and the finality of verdicts, by making post-conviction revision more accessible. In this article we describe the current legal framework for revising cases. We also study how the revision procedure functions in practice, by looking at the types and numbers of (successful) requests for further investigations and applications for revision. We observe three challenges in finding the right balance in the revision process in the Netherlands. These challenges concern: 1) the scope of the novum criterion (which is strict), 2) the appropriate role of an advisory committee (the ACAS) in revision cases (functioning too much as a pre-filter for the Supreme Court) and, 3) the difficulties that arise due to requiring a defence council when requesting a revision (e.g., financial burdens).

Contains fulltext : 224753.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 13 p.

Contains fulltext : 232835.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) 6 p.

Item does not contain fulltext ICON•S CONFERENCE, 06 juli 2022

Contains fulltext : 248434.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Item does not contain fulltext Law & Society conference, 23 juli 2022

Item does not contain fulltext 27 januari 2022

Item does not contain fulltext Lezing bestuursrechters Zeeland/West Brabant, 21 januari 2022

Contains fulltext : 243886.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)