Law in Action / Recht der Werkelijkheid

In recent years, indications emerged that the assumption of self-efficacy in the Dutch Legal Aid Law might have been an impediment for accessing subsidised legal aid for citizens who suffered from the childcare benefits situation. The temporary Arrangement Advice Certificate Self-efficacy envisages to fix this potential flaw. Jin Ho Verdonschot, together with his colleagues Carla van Rooijen, Susanne Peters and Corry van Zeeland,  shows how insights in the people using the arrangement, their legal problems and situations, the nature and effectiveness of interventions under the arrangement, and the experiences of people and the professionals helping them, can inform changes in policy.

The elimination and the regulation of informal payments in the state-funded health care sector is an on-going policy fiasco in the post-socialist Hungary. Fanni Gyurko analysed patients’ and doctors’ perceptions regarding the state regulation of ‘thank-you-money’ and she also inquired what these actors actually perceive as ‘law’. She concluded that although the elimination of the informal payments by using either forbidding or encouraging formal interventions is difficult, greater transparency throughout the healthcare sector would eliminate some of the coercive factors that patients are faced with in relation to the doctors.

In England and Wales, the implementation of equality and human rights norms has been lacking. Through semi-structured interviews, David Barrett explores the legal consciousness of individuals responsible for the implementation of these norms in regulators, inspectorates and ombuds. Through this work it is possible to see different types of legal consciousness and how legal consciousness influences implementation.

In the Netherlands, social security organizations employ algorithmic profiling technologies to combat fraud, but the use of these tools poses risks of algorithmic discrimination. This episode explores how the use of algorithmic profiling technologies can lead to discriminatory outcomes that clash with the right to non-discrimination. Drawing on expert interviews and the Dutch Childcare Benefits Scandal, Lucas Michael Haitsma discusses how unmitigated risks of discrimination interact to produce discriminatory outcomes and emphasize the crucial need for a lifecycle approach in identifying and mitigating risks of algorithmic discrimination.

How to shift blame for the childcare benefits affair? In the aftermath of the childcare benefits affair, elected officials, parliamentarians, public officials and the judiciary engaged in blame games to deal with, shift, and minimize their own role in the affair. In this podcast, Koen Migchelbrink provides a reconstruction of the childcare benefits affair and analyzes how politicians, administrators and the judiciary played the blame game based on the paper he wrote with Sandra van Thiel.

In recent years, there have been multiple 'system failures' in the domain of automated social security enforcement across welfare states. The Dutch childcare benefits scandal is an especially alarming example, among other reasons because of the scope of systemic weaknesses in the rule of law system (Rechtsstaat). As part of a broader investigation into system-level risks in the digital welfare state, Maarten Bouwmeester examines the (mal)functioning of rule of law control mechanisms in the childcare benefits scandal.

Season 4 of the podcast Law in Action revolves around this year’s special issue, “The quest for implementation: can governments still get things done?”, of the Journal of Empirical Research on Law in Action (Recht der Werkelijkheid). In this episode you will meet your hosts: Paulien de Winter, assistant professor of empirical legal research at the University of Groningen, and Heinrich Winter, professor of public administration at the University of Groningen. They’ll talk you through the set-up of the season and the background of the podcast.

During the first 6 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic the hearings of (urgent) family cases continued with the use of telephones, Skype or in hybrid format. This created all kinds of participation challenges. Anne Janssen examines to what extent litigants were able to effectively participate during these hearings. To do so she applies McKeever’s remote justice framework, the so-called ‘ladder of legal participation’ to these specific litigants.

In Belgium, the Central Solvency Register (RegSol) was launched within the commercial courts in 2017. Lisa Pelssers, together with Christophe Dubois researched how RegSol was designed and developed within the commercial courts and the impact it had on the working context of its stakeholders. They conclude that without mobilizing and involving court practitioners in the design, development and implementation of the tool, its capacity to increase access to and transparency of justice will remain problematic and controversial.

The COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on everyone in a way nobody could have predicted and the judicial system was no exception. Marieke Dubelaar, together with María Bruquetas-Callejo and Karen Geerstema, analysed the role of the lawyer in criminal law, immigration detention law and asylum law in the context of digitalisation measures during the COVID-19 lockdowns in the Netherlands.

In Australia, psychiatric and psychological clinical assessments have seen an increased digitalisation process. Researcher Carolyn McKay examines how digitalisation processes in the criminal justice system are altering modes of conducting clinical assessments of a vulnerable population: people-in-prison. Despite the growing ubiquity of remote clinical assessments of people-in-prison, McKay also finds some reservations regarding the remote mode.

Citizens can complain about maladministration or mistreatment by public bodies at the public ombuds. In a multi-method study, Julia Dahlvik studied the different ways citizens can file a complaint and the importance ombuds institutions worldwide attach to personal, other analogous and diverse online forms of contact possibilities for citizens. She concludes that despite digitalization developments, the personal encounter between citizens and ombuds still plays an important role in many countries.

Personal assistance in a world of digitalised public services is important. Stine Piilgaard Porner Nielsen, together with Ole Hammerslev, analysed the role of digitalisation from a bottom-up perspective as they zoom in on socially marginalised citizens’ access to welfare rights in the context of the digitalised Danish welfare state. They conclude that the assistance of professionals can be decisive for individuals’ ability to access their rights in a digitalised welfare state.

Developments in digital technologies have induced profound changes in the way legal services and legal dispute resolution bodies operate. However, little is known about how the use of digital technologies in the field of law affects access to justice for individuals and businesses. Marijke ter Voert, together with Anna Pivaty and Enguerrand Marique, edited the special issue in which several researchers contribute to the empirical evidence on access to justice in a digital era.

Season 3 of the podcast Law in Action revolves around this year’s special issue, “Access to Justice in a digital era”, of the Journal of Empirical Research on Law in Action (Recht der Werkelijkheid). In this episode you will meet your hosts: Paulien de Winter, lecturer and researcher at the University of Groningen, and Elke Olthuis, lecturer and researcher at the University of Amsterdam. They’ll talk you through the set-up of the season and the background of the podcast.

Wie heeft er recht op een bed in het ziekenhuis en wie niet? En welke impact heeft de corona crisis op de rechtspleging, en de toegang tot het recht voor burgers en bedrijven? Dit zijn de twee onderwerpen van het tweede deel van de podcast. Recht der Werkelijkheid redacteuren Nienke Doornbos en Danielle Chevalier nemen je mee door het landschap van de sociale werking van het recht in corona tijd, en in het bijzonder de impact van corona regels op het maatschappelijk leven. Eerst buigt filosoof/socioloog Tobias Arnoldussen zich over het verdelingsvraagstuk, aan de hand van het werk van Ulrich Beck over de risicomaatschappij. Daarna is het woord aan raadsadviseur en hoogleraar Frans van Dijk, die ingaat op de uitdagingen van de corona crisis voor de organisatie van de rechtspraak.

Hosts: Nienke Doornbos & Daniëlle Chevalier

Productie: Daniël van de Poppe

Welke impact heeft de corona crisis op de criminaliteitscijfers? En: pakken de maatregelen om de crisis te beheersen niet erger uit dan de crisis zelf, en hoe bepaal je dat? Dit zijn de twee onderwerpen van het eerste deel van de podcast. Recht der Werkelijkheid redacteuren Nienke Doornbos en Danielle Chevalier nemen je mee door het landschap van de sociale werking van het recht in corona tijd, en in het bijzonder de impact van corona regels op het maatschappelijk leven. Eerst vertellen onderzoekers Edwin Kruisbergen en Marco Haas over hun analyse van de ontwikkeling van criminaliteit als gevolg van de lockdown. Daarna spreekt rechtssocioloog Roel Pieterman over zijn analyse van de kosten versus de baten van de genomen corona maatregelen.

Hosts: Nienke Doornbos & Daniëlle Chevalier.

Productie: Daniël van de Poppe.