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
{"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":"23 1","pages":"549 - 567"},"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.