Author: admin

Voor een fundamentele rechtswetenschap (2010)

Het Nederlandse onderzoek naar rechtsvinding moet een nieuwe wending nemen. In plaats van de apaiserende toon (‘De meeste zaken zijn gewoon duidelijk’) en de sussende normativiteit (‘Rechters moeten integer omgaan met de dilemma’s waarvoor hun taak hen plaatst’) komt het aan op een rigoreuzere analyse van d activiteit van de rechter.

Voor een fundamentele rechtswetenschap, in Nederlands Juristenblad 2010, p. 604 e.v.

A distributive approach to migration law: or the convergence of communitarianism,libertarianism, and the status quo (2010)

In this chapter, I will argue that the debate about cosmopolitanism vs. sovereignty can only be considered as a relevant debate if the wrong questions are asked – at least in my field of expertise, migration law. The question which is at the heart of this debate in migration law (under which circumstances should aliens be admitted) is a false one. In my view, the issue is not the just distribution of membership. Instead, the debate is mostly about the position of aliens who are in the community already, and whom the community prefers to consider as nonmembers, or even as non-entities. If it would be acknowledged that the aliens whose position is being discussed are already in the community, it would become clear that their position can either be debated under the rubric of admission, or under the rubric of redistribution. The obsessive way in which the redistribution option is ignored suggests that the (ideological, material, and/or other) stakes for debating migration under the admission rubric are high.

A distributive approach to migration law: or the convergence of communitarianism, libertarianism, and the status quo, in Roland Pierik & Wouter Werner (eds): Cosmopolitanism in Context: Perspectives from International Law and Political Theory, Cambridge University Press 2010, p. 249-274

Subsidiarity and ‘Arguability’: the European Court of Human Rights’ Case Law on Judicial Review in Asylum Cases (2009)

The European Court of Human Rights ’ case law on judicial review in asylum cases is not
entirely consistent. However, it can be interpreted as consistent if two presumptions are
accepted. First, that, as the Court’s role should be subsidiary to that of domestic courts,
domestic judicial review should at least be of the same quality and substance as the European
Court of Human Rights ’ review. Secondly, that the Court distinguishes between arguable
and non-arguable cases not just in the context of Article 13 ECHR and of the
admissibility of applications, but that this distinction is central to its entire case law about
the asylum procedure. This analysis results in a coherent doctrine on deadlines for submitting
evidence, the burden of proof, the intensity of judicial review, and suspensive effect. If
the Court understands its case law in this way, it can prevent it from becoming, in some
respects, a court of first instance.

Subsidiarity and ‘Arguability’: The European Court of Human Rights Case Law on Judicial Review in Asylum Cases, in International Journal of Refugee Law 2009, p. 48-74

Structural Instability: Strasbourg Case Law on Children’s Family Reunion (2009)

In this article, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on children’s family reunion is examined. The argument is that the Court’s case law is necessarily inconsistent. This is so in part as a consequence of the structure of international legal argument, and partly as a consequence of the seeming normative conflict about the legitimacy of migration control. On both points, the Court is torn between two equally legitimate and equally untenable extremes, which forces the Court to take a centrist position and to acknowledge both the legitimacy and the untenable nature of any position. The main part of the article analyses how this takes shape in the legal technicalities in the judgements under review.

Structural Instability: Strasbourg Case Law on Children’s Family Reunion, in European Journal of Migration and Law 11 (2009), p. 271-293

Freedom and Constraint in Adjudication. Dutch courts on aliens law 1945-1967 (2008)

This article is a critical analysis of Dutch immigration case law in the period 1945-1967, i.e. before the introduction of modern legislation.

Freedom and Constraint in Adjudication. Dutch courts on aliens law, in Anita Böcker et al (eds): Migration Law and Sociology of Law. Collected Essays in honour of Cees Groenendijk, Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen 2008, p. 345-354.

The Human Costs of Border Control (2007)

This article outlines the relationship between irregular immigration, increased border control, and the number of casualties at Europe’s maritime borders. The conclusion is that the number of fatalities is increasing as a result of increased border control. The author argues that States have a positive obligation under international law to address this issue, and formulates concrete proposals to monitor the number of border deaths.

The Human Costs of Border Control, European Journal of Migration and Law, 9 (2007), p. 147-161

Ze stikken, verdrinken en verbranden en wij halen achteloos de schouders op (2005)

Is de brand in het detentiecentrum op Schiphol waarbij elf gedetineerde vreemdelingen omkwamen echt te beschouwen als ‘noodlot’? En al die vluchtelingen die sterven aan de buitengrenzen van Europa, is dat louter hun verantwoordelijkheid? Stop het cynisme. Open de ogen voor wat er gebeurt.

Ze stikken, verdrinken en verbranden en wij halen achteloos de schouders op, NRC-Handelsblad, 5 november 2005