Privacy, promotionalism and the proliferation of state-performed criminal record screening in the Netherlands: How a restrictive legal framework can still result in a steep increase of criminal background checks

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Criminology & Criminal Justice Pub Date : 2023-04-18 DOI:10.1177/17488958231161427
E. V. Zand-Kurtovic, M. Boone
{"title":"Privacy, promotionalism and the proliferation of state-performed criminal record screening in the Netherlands: How a restrictive legal framework can still result in a steep increase of criminal background checks","authors":"E. V. Zand-Kurtovic, M. Boone","doi":"10.1177/17488958231161427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Netherlands has endorsed a unique system regarding the management, disclosure and screening of criminal records. Disclosure to third parties is strongly restricted, yet all (potential) employees can request a government agency to provide a risk assessment − known as a Certificate of Conduct (‘VOG’ in Dutch) − for every kind of employment application to determine whether they are fit for a given job. This article explains how and why this Dutch policy approach, deemed respectful of individual privacy rights, can nonetheless go hand in hand with the promotion, proliferation and pervasiveness of criminal record screening. It challenges the often dichotomic approach of the comparative literature on criminal record policies and helps understand that privacy protection alone cannot be fully equated with the rehabilitation and re-entry in society of people with a criminal history. Although the Dutch criminal record system avoids any unnecessary publicity of criminal record data, it nonetheless triggers adverse impairments on reintegration processes through stigmatisation and exclusion resulting from the ubiquitous use of Certificates of Conduct in the labour market. This questions the promotion of the Dutch screening instrument as an exemplary model for criminal record information sharing within Europe.","PeriodicalId":47217,"journal":{"name":"Criminology & Criminal Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminology & Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958231161427","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The Netherlands has endorsed a unique system regarding the management, disclosure and screening of criminal records. Disclosure to third parties is strongly restricted, yet all (potential) employees can request a government agency to provide a risk assessment − known as a Certificate of Conduct (‘VOG’ in Dutch) − for every kind of employment application to determine whether they are fit for a given job. This article explains how and why this Dutch policy approach, deemed respectful of individual privacy rights, can nonetheless go hand in hand with the promotion, proliferation and pervasiveness of criminal record screening. It challenges the often dichotomic approach of the comparative literature on criminal record policies and helps understand that privacy protection alone cannot be fully equated with the rehabilitation and re-entry in society of people with a criminal history. Although the Dutch criminal record system avoids any unnecessary publicity of criminal record data, it nonetheless triggers adverse impairments on reintegration processes through stigmatisation and exclusion resulting from the ubiquitous use of Certificates of Conduct in the labour market. This questions the promotion of the Dutch screening instrument as an exemplary model for criminal record information sharing within Europe.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
荷兰的隐私、宣传主义和国家犯罪记录筛查的激增:限制性的法律框架如何仍然会导致犯罪背景调查的急剧增加
荷兰赞同在管理、披露和审查犯罪记录方面建立一个独特的制度。向第三方披露信息受到严格限制,但所有(潜在)员工都可以要求政府机构为各种就业申请提供风险评估,即行为证明(荷兰语中的“VOG”),以确定他们是否适合特定的工作。这篇文章解释了荷兰的这种被视为尊重个人隐私权的政策方法如何以及为什么能够与犯罪记录筛查的推广、扩散和普及齐头并进。它挑战了关于犯罪记录政策的比较文献中经常存在的二分法,并有助于理解仅凭隐私保护不能完全等同于有犯罪史的人的康复和重返社会。尽管荷兰的犯罪记录系统避免了对犯罪记录数据进行任何不必要的公开,但由于在劳动力市场上普遍使用行为证明,它会因污名化和排斥而对重返社会进程造成不利影响。这对荷兰筛查工具作为欧洲犯罪记录信息共享的示范模式的推广提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Criminology & Criminal Justice
Criminology & Criminal Justice CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
68
期刊最新文献
Situational context and public perceptions of officer appearance: A vignette-based study of police uniforms and accouterments How cryptomarket communities navigate marketplace structures, risk perceptions and ideologies amid evolving cryptocurrency practices Evaluation of an enhanced behavioural monitoring system in UK open prisons ‘I’m a red-blooded male’: Understanding men’s experiences of domestic abuse through a feminist lens Stable housing, ‘home’ and desistance: Views from Aotearoa New Zealand
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1