Abstract
The main research question addressed in this report is:
“Is PTD in practice used as a means of last resort (ultima ratio) in the participating
countries?”
More specific secondary research questions:
- How extensively is PTD used?
- What developments can be observed with respect to the use of PTD and alternatives,
what factors appear to be relevant in this respect?
- What factors influence decision-making?
- What parties are involved and what are their roles?
- Are alternatives to PTD available and are they used? What are potential obstacles?
- If alternatives are used are there indications of net widening?
- Are there any groups which are treated differently and if so, which ones, and in
what respect?
- To what extent do European aspects play a role for PTD practice, and could cooperation within Europe or internationally help to avoid PTD?
The results of our study are relevant not only for scholars but also, in particular, for practitioners and policy makers, both on the national and the European level. Practitioners – judges, defence lawyers, public prosecutors, as well as those from the police, criminal justice, social and related fields – should profit from our insights, which demonstrate that many problems affect different jurisdictions in the same way, but constructive options are sometimes found elsewhere. These options may serve as examples for domestic purposes.
“Is PTD in practice used as a means of last resort (ultima ratio) in the participating
countries?”
More specific secondary research questions:
- How extensively is PTD used?
- What developments can be observed with respect to the use of PTD and alternatives,
what factors appear to be relevant in this respect?
- What factors influence decision-making?
- What parties are involved and what are their roles?
- Are alternatives to PTD available and are they used? What are potential obstacles?
- If alternatives are used are there indications of net widening?
- Are there any groups which are treated differently and if so, which ones, and in
what respect?
- To what extent do European aspects play a role for PTD practice, and could cooperation within Europe or internationally help to avoid PTD?
The results of our study are relevant not only for scholars but also, in particular, for practitioners and policy makers, both on the national and the European level. Practitioners – judges, defence lawyers, public prosecutors, as well as those from the police, criminal justice, social and related fields – should profit from our insights, which demonstrate that many problems affect different jurisdictions in the same way, but constructive options are sometimes found elsewhere. These options may serve as examples for domestic purposes.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Place of Publication | Vienna |
| Publisher | Institute for the Sociology of Law and Criminology |
| Commissioning body | EU Commission |
| Number of pages | 81 |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2018 |
Bibliographical note
A translation in Dutch is also available on http://www.irks.at/detour/publications.htmlUN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- Pre-trial detention
- Criminal Procedure
- Comparative research
- EU
- DG Justice
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'DETOUR - Towards Pre-trial Detention as Ultima Ratio: Comparative Report'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.-
Actors, roles and responsibilities in the pre-trial detention decision-making process
Rogan, M. & Lindeman, J., 2024, European Perspectives on Pre-Trial Detention: A Means of Last Resort?. Morgenstern, C., Hammerschick, W. & Rogan, M. (eds.). Abingdon: Routledge, p. 200-213 14 p. (Frontiers of Criminal Justice).Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review
Open AccessFile -
Pre-trial detention in the Netherlands: absolutely low, relatively high
Lindeman, J., Jacobs, P. & Boone, M., Jan 2024, European Perspectives on Pre-Trial Detention: A Means Of Last Resort?. Morgenstern, C., Hammerschick, W. & Rogan, M. (eds.). Abingdon: Routledge, p. 142-164 23 p. (Frontiers of Criminal Justice).Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review
Open AccessFile -
To have your cake and eat it too: A short history of EU's failure to harmonise pre-trial detention
Lindeman, J., Mar 2023, Of swords and shields: due process and crime control in times of globalization: Liber amicorum prof. dr. J.A.E. Vervaele. Luchtman, M., De Jong, F., Kristen, F., Ligeti, K., Lindeman, J., Tosza, S., Widdershoven, R. & Zaitch, D. (eds.). 1 ed. The Hague: Eleven, p. 339-347 9 p. (Pompe Reeks; no. 104).Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Academic › peer-review
Open AccessFile -
Alternatieven voor voorlopige hechtenis in Europa en Nederland: de advocaat als onterechte sleutelhouder
Jacobs, P., Lindeman, J. M. W. & Boone, M. M., Mar 2019, In: Delikt en Delinkwent. 49, 3, p. 170-187 17 p., 12.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review
Open AccessFile -
De praktijk van de Europese toezichtmaatregel: begin van een meeromvattende invloed van de EU op de voorlopige hechtenis?
Lindeman, J. M. W., Jacobs, P. & Boone, M., Dec 2018, In: Strafblad. 2018, 6, p. 30-34 5 p., 57.Translated title of the contribution :The European Supervision Order in practice: start of a broader influence of the EU on the practice of pre-trial detention? Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review
Open AccessFile
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver