“Victims’ participation rights in the post-sentencing phase:The Netherlands in comparative perspective”

Victims’ rights have proliferated rapidly over the past decades. However, the development of rights in the post-sentencing phase has lagged behind. In this article, we argue that victims’ rights may contribute to the acknowledgement of victims, something that victimological research suggests is important for victims’ well-being at every stage of criminal proceedings. We review a new Dutch law and a legislative proposal aiming to improve victims’ rights in the post-sentencing phase in relation to conditional release from prison and conditional discharge from forensic psychiatric hospital. More specifically, we compare these (proposed) victims’ participatory rights with those existing in the Canadian, Belgian and German framework. We argue for a strengthened position of the victim in the post-sentencing phase. We close by showing that the practical effectiveness of these proposed rights is put at risk by COVID-19 and states’ response to the same

Producing true-color rainbows with patterned multi-layer liquid-crystal polarization gratings

Instrumentatio

Recognising Victimhood: Lessons from the International Criminal Court and Mass Claim Programmes for the Compensation Procedure Parallel to the Trial of International Crimes in the Netherlands

In the Netherlands, the Dutch criminal court in The Hague (hereinafter: ‘Netherlands International Crimes Court’ or ‘NIC court’) is assigned to try international crimes, and to provide compensation to victims of such crimes. Whereas it has specific criminal laws at its disposal to try international crimes, it applies ‘regular’ Dutch civil law to assess claims for compensation. Yet compensation for international crimes entails challenges that are quite different from domestic crimes: international crimes are normally committed against a large number of victims, and frequently result in bodily harm. This article argues that the NIC court will most likely rule a large number of claims for compensation inadmissible, as a consequence of which victims cannot benefit from the advantages inherent in the award of compensation within the criminal process. It then explores the adjudicative and reparatory standards that the International Criminal Court and mass claim programmes have applied to simplify both the adjudication of a large number of claims, and the calculation of a large number of instances of bodily damage. It is submitted that adoption by the NIC court of international reparatory standards could facilitate the assessment of a large number of civil claims within the criminal process, without prejudice to the legitimate interests of the defendant for an adequate procedure. However, these standards require the NIC court to strike a new balance between tailor-made compensation and symbolic compensation, and thereby between corrective justice and restorative justice