Publication

Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs: Does judicial review function as a safety net?

Bruijn, L. M., Vols, M. & Brouwer, J. G., Jan-2018, In : International Journal of Drug Policy. 51, p. 137-147 11 p.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

APA

Bruijn, L. M., Vols, M., & Brouwer, J. G. (2018). Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs: Does judicial review function as a safety net? International Journal of Drug Policy, 51, 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.08.003

Author

Bruijn, Larissa Michelle ; Vols, Michel ; Brouwer, Jan G. / Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs : Does judicial review function as a safety net?. In: International Journal of Drug Policy. 2018 ; Vol. 51. pp. 137-147.

Harvard

Bruijn, LM, Vols, M & Brouwer, JG 2018, 'Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs: Does judicial review function as a safety net?', International Journal of Drug Policy, vol. 51, pp. 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.08.003

Standard

Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs : Does judicial review function as a safety net? / Bruijn, Larissa Michelle; Vols, Michel; Brouwer, Jan G.

In: International Journal of Drug Policy, Vol. 51, 01.2018, p. 137-147.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Vancouver

Bruijn LM, Vols M, Brouwer JG. Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs: Does judicial review function as a safety net? International Journal of Drug Policy. 2018 Jan;51:137-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.08.003


BibTeX

@article{0896e9af536f47a99d616eb0fa49a647,
title = "Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs: Does judicial review function as a safety net?",
abstract = "Background: A widespread sense of a failing criminal justice system and increased feelings of insecurity changed the response to crime into a culture of control, which is characterized by policies that punish and exclude. In the Netherlands, these influences can be witnessed in the war on drugs where local authorities use their administrative power to close homes involved in drug-related crime. Citizens can invoke judicial review over these administrative interferences by claiming that such closure results in an unfair balance between purposes, means and consequences. This paper assesses whether judicial review functions as a safety net against losing one{\textquoteright}s home due to drug-related crime.Methods: We used doctrinal legal research methods to examine the “law in the books” and empirical legal research methods to analyse the “law in action”. We used a survey to investigate how often the drug-related closure power was used in 2015, and we statistically analysed all published case law of Dutchlower courts between 2007 and 2016.Results: The scope of the closure power broadened over the years and our data show that local authoritiesfiercely make use of this instrument. In 41.4% of the cases, citizens are successful infighting the closure.While scholarly literature indicates that judicial courts function as safeguards by questioning theproportionality of administrative action, raising a proportionality defence does not necessarily result in amore favourable outcome for citizens. In fact, raising a proportionality defence makes it more likely toresult in dismissal of the appeal.Conclusion: The stretched scope of the drug-related closure power together with the relatively low success rate of citizens who fight the loss of their home and a seemingly meaningless proportionality check show no sign of a safety net against the loss of one{\textquoteright}s home at the suit of a local authority.",
keywords = "drug policy, eviction, judicial review, empirical legal research, culture of control, proportionality principle, War on drugs, Dutch drug policy, Home closures, Eviction, Judicial review, Empirical legal research, Culture of control, ANTISOCIAL-BEHAVIOR, POLICY, CANNABIS, HEALTH, JUSTICE",
author = "Bruijn, {Larissa Michelle} and Michel Vols and Brouwer, {Jan G.}",
year = "2018",
month = jan,
doi = "10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.08.003",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "137--147",
journal = "International Journal of Drug Policy",
issn = "0955-3959",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Home closure as a weapon in the Dutch war on drugs

T2 - Does judicial review function as a safety net?

AU - Bruijn, Larissa Michelle

AU - Vols, Michel

AU - Brouwer, Jan G.

PY - 2018/1

Y1 - 2018/1

N2 - Background: A widespread sense of a failing criminal justice system and increased feelings of insecurity changed the response to crime into a culture of control, which is characterized by policies that punish and exclude. In the Netherlands, these influences can be witnessed in the war on drugs where local authorities use their administrative power to close homes involved in drug-related crime. Citizens can invoke judicial review over these administrative interferences by claiming that such closure results in an unfair balance between purposes, means and consequences. This paper assesses whether judicial review functions as a safety net against losing one’s home due to drug-related crime.Methods: We used doctrinal legal research methods to examine the “law in the books” and empirical legal research methods to analyse the “law in action”. We used a survey to investigate how often the drug-related closure power was used in 2015, and we statistically analysed all published case law of Dutchlower courts between 2007 and 2016.Results: The scope of the closure power broadened over the years and our data show that local authoritiesfiercely make use of this instrument. In 41.4% of the cases, citizens are successful infighting the closure.While scholarly literature indicates that judicial courts function as safeguards by questioning theproportionality of administrative action, raising a proportionality defence does not necessarily result in amore favourable outcome for citizens. In fact, raising a proportionality defence makes it more likely toresult in dismissal of the appeal.Conclusion: The stretched scope of the drug-related closure power together with the relatively low success rate of citizens who fight the loss of their home and a seemingly meaningless proportionality check show no sign of a safety net against the loss of one’s home at the suit of a local authority.

AB - Background: A widespread sense of a failing criminal justice system and increased feelings of insecurity changed the response to crime into a culture of control, which is characterized by policies that punish and exclude. In the Netherlands, these influences can be witnessed in the war on drugs where local authorities use their administrative power to close homes involved in drug-related crime. Citizens can invoke judicial review over these administrative interferences by claiming that such closure results in an unfair balance between purposes, means and consequences. This paper assesses whether judicial review functions as a safety net against losing one’s home due to drug-related crime.Methods: We used doctrinal legal research methods to examine the “law in the books” and empirical legal research methods to analyse the “law in action”. We used a survey to investigate how often the drug-related closure power was used in 2015, and we statistically analysed all published case law of Dutchlower courts between 2007 and 2016.Results: The scope of the closure power broadened over the years and our data show that local authoritiesfiercely make use of this instrument. In 41.4% of the cases, citizens are successful infighting the closure.While scholarly literature indicates that judicial courts function as safeguards by questioning theproportionality of administrative action, raising a proportionality defence does not necessarily result in amore favourable outcome for citizens. In fact, raising a proportionality defence makes it more likely toresult in dismissal of the appeal.Conclusion: The stretched scope of the drug-related closure power together with the relatively low success rate of citizens who fight the loss of their home and a seemingly meaningless proportionality check show no sign of a safety net against the loss of one’s home at the suit of a local authority.

KW - drug policy

KW - eviction

KW - judicial review

KW - empirical legal research

KW - culture of control

KW - proportionality principle

KW - War on drugs

KW - Dutch drug policy

KW - Home closures

KW - Eviction

KW - Judicial review

KW - Empirical legal research

KW - Culture of control

KW - ANTISOCIAL-BEHAVIOR

KW - POLICY

KW - CANNABIS

KW - HEALTH

KW - JUSTICE

U2 - 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.08.003

DO - 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.08.003

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 137

EP - 147

JO - International Journal of Drug Policy

JF - International Journal of Drug Policy

SN - 0955-3959

ER -

ID: 47655257