165 research outputs found
De rechter als wetgever-plaatsvervanger
In algemeenbelangacties treedt de rechter soms op als wetgever-plaatsvervanger. Dat roept legitimiteitsvragen op. Mag hij dat wel en kan hij het wel? Rechtsvergelijkend onderzoek toont dat rechters verschillend aankijken tegen wie een ‘public interest’-zaak mag brengen en hoe de representativiteit van bijvoorbeeld belangenorganisaties die opkomen voor publieke belangen beoordeeld dient te worden. Bovendien bestaan er internationaal uiteenlopende visies over de uitspraakbevoegdheden waarover rechters kunnen beschikken. Waar in Nederland tamelijk krampachtig lijkt te worden omgesprongen met rechterlijke bevelen die opdrachten bevatten voor de wetgever, bestaan elders wetgevingsbevelen die juist een constitutionele dialoog beogen te bewerkstelligen tussen rechter, bestuur en wetgever
Evidence-Based Regulation and the Translation from Empirical Data to Normative Choices: A Proportionality Test
Studies have shown that the effects of scientific research on
law and policy making are often fairly limited. Different reasons
can be given for this: scientists are better at falsifying
hypothesis than at predicting the future, the outcomes of
academic research and empirical evidence can be inconclusive
or even contradictory, the timing of the legislative cycle
and the production of research show mismatches, there can
be clashes between the political rationality and the economic
or scientific rationality in the law making process et
cetera. There is one ‘wicked’ methodological problem,
though, that affects all regulatory policy making, namely:
the ‘jump’ from empirical facts (e.g. there are too few organ
donors in the Netherlands and the voluntary registration
system is not working) to normative recommendations of
what the law should regulate (e.g. we need to change the
default rule so that everybody in principle becomes an
organ donor unless one opts out). We are interested in how
this translation process takes place and whether it could
make a difference if the empirical research on which legislative
drafts are build is more quantitative type of research or
more qualitative. That is why we have selected two cases in
which either type of research played a role during the drafting
phase. We use the lens of the proportionality principle in
order to see how empirical data and scientific evidence are
used by legislative drafters to justify normative choices in
the design of new laws
- …