,

Epilogue

Shortly after the killing of Osama Bin Laden, I heard a 9/11 victim state in reaction: ‘9/11 was the beginning of a book. Now we have reached the end of a Chapter, whilst it is still unknown how the story will end.’ Ten years after 9/11 and a few months after the assassination of Osama Bin Laden, we may be able to close a decade that was dominated by a fear of terrorist attacks. This fear of terrorism has contributed to a changed political and societal climate, the initiation of a ‘war against international (Islamic) terrorism’ and a multitude of counterterrorism measures, which were partly successful, partly sharply criticized and for another part their effect is still unknown and may always be unknown. Ten years after 9/11 the threat of terrorism is not gone. Instead, we have recently been dramatically reminded that terrorism is not limited to Islamic terrorism, but can arise from any extreme ideology. The experience of devastating terrorist attacks committed by a right-wing extremist on July 22, 2011 in Norway may again change perceptions with regard to terrorism and counterterrorism policy. In any event, at this point we should be able to assess and judge the measures that were taken to counter terrorism in response to the threat of Islamic international terrorism with more hindsight and in a more balanced way. In seeking the adoption of measures to confront threats previously unknown to the state that considers itself bound by the rule of law, it is generally insufficient to simply adjust a framework for the purpose of encompassing new investigative needs. This would affect the synthesis between shield and sword in the criminal justice system in an ill-considered manner. Ten years after the confrontation with the devastating attacks of September 11, 2001 and the implementation of many counterterrorism measures in the subsequent era, adopted under a widely felt haste—tomorrow the next attack may occur—it is possible to reassess our methods to confront threats such as terrorism at a greater distance. Sometimes it may be required to adjust the system traditionally adopted to deal with crime and threats of a different nature. However, this may only be done by first going back to the basic, fundamental, rule of law principles that should, at any time—with the exception of

M.F.H. Hirsch Ballin, Anticipative Criminal Investigation, DOI: 10.1007/978-90-6704-843-9, Ó T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author 2012

651

652

Epilogue

true and well circumscribed emergency situations—underpin a system of criminal procedural law. This book has provided such a reconsideration of measures that aim to enable a form of investigation that could combine the prevention of terrorism with the desire to eventually prosecute and punish terrorists. As a result, the role of the criminal justice system in providing security under the rule of law has been repositioned, and the limits on the role of the criminal investigation in preventing terrorism prevention have been identified. It is not unlikely that in the future new forms of criminal behavior will arise, which place new demands on the character of the criminal investigation. For example, cybercrime may confront the government with new intangible threats, involving complex technological questions, requiring the government to explore new investigative challenges. Or, as another example, it may be required to reconsider the approach chosen to confront terrorism, in order to increase the capabilities of targeting lone wolves, such as Anders Behring Breivik. The normative framework adopted in Chap. 8 of this book has been particularly geared towards the anticipative criminal investigation of terrorist crimes. However, the constitutive principles and parameters identified and addressed will at any time continue to provide the architecture for the regulation of criminal investigations. And the line of reasoning provided can also be used for dealing with possible new investigative challenges, for which purpose it may be needed to set new preferences.

Bibliography

Ackerman B (2006) Before the next attack. Preserving civil liberties in an age of terrorism. Yale University Press, New Haven Addink GH (2010) Goed bestuur (inaugural lecture Utrecht). Kluwer, Deventer Agamben G (2005) State of exception (translated by Kevin Attell). University of Chicago Press, Chicago Aksu M (2007) Straatsburgse kaders voor terrorismebestrijding, EVRM, strafrecht en terrorisme (diss. Nijmegen). Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Albrecht PA (2010) Kriminologie, Eine Grundlegung zum Strafrecht. Verlag CH Beck, München Alink M (2004) AIVD-informatie als bewijs in het strafproces. In: Duyx PD (ed) Via Straatsburg. Liber amicorum Egbert Myjer. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 155–179 Allen RJ, Hoffmann JL, Livingston DA, Stuntz WJ (2005) Criminal procedure: investigation and right to counsel. Aspen Publishers, New York Amar AR (1997) The constitution and criminal procedure, first principles. Yale University Press, New Haven Amsterdam AG (1974) Perspectives on the fourth amendment. Minn L Rev 58:349–478 (Anonymous) Note (2008a) Mechanisms of secrecy. Harv L Rev 121:1556–1577 (Anonymous) Note (2008b) ‘Shifting the FISA paradigm protecting civil liberties by eliminating ex ante judicial approval’. Harv L Rev 121:2200–2221 (Anonymous) Note (2009) Retreat: the supreme court and the new police. Harv L Rev 122: 1706–1727 Antkowiak BA (2007) Saving probable cause. Suffolk U L Rev 40:569–606 Arai Y (2006) Chapter 5. The system of restrictions. In: van Dijk P et al (eds) Theory and practice of the European convention on human rights. Intersentia, Antwerpen Arcila F Jr (2010) The death of suspicion. Wm & Mary L Rev 51:1275–1341 Ashcroft J (2006) Never again. Securing America and restoring justice. Center Street, New York Ashworth A (2007) Security, terrorism and the value of human rights. In: Goold BJ, Lazarus L (eds) Security and human rights. Hart Publishing, Portland, pp 201–226 Ashworth A (2009) Principles of criminal law. Oxford University Press, New York Baaijens-van Geloven YGM, Simmelink JBHM (2002) Normering van de opsporing. In: Groenhuijsen MS, Knigge G (eds) Dwangmiddelen en rechtsmiddelen. Derde interim rapport onderzoeksproject strafvordering 2001. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 437–598 Baker JE (2007a) In the common defense, national security law for perilous times. Cambridge University Press, New York

M.F.H. Hirsch Ballin, Anticipative Criminal Investigation, DOI: 10.1007/978-90-6704-843-9, Ó T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author 2012

653

654

Bibliography

Baker JE (2007b) What’s international law got to do with it? Transnational law and the intelligence mission. Mich J Int’l L 28:639–661 Bal P (2007) Uitsluiting van de uitsluitingsregel in de verenigde staten. De zaak Hudson v. Michigan. DD 2007 17:251–275 Barak-Erez D, Waxman MC (2009) Secret evidence and the due process of terrorist detentions. Colum J Transnat’l L 48:3–58 Barron JA, Dienes CT (2003) Constitutional law in a nutshell. West Group, St Paul Bassiouni MC (2002) Legal control of international terrorism: a policy-oriented assessment. Harv Int’l L J 43:83–103 Bassiouni MC (2005) The regression of the rule of law under the guise of combating terrorism. Int Rev Penal Law 76:17–26 Bassiouni MC (2008) ‘‘Terrorism’’: Reflections on legitimacy and policy considerations. In: Karawan IA et al (eds) Values and violence, intangible aspects of terrorism. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 233–256 Beccaria C (1971) Over misdaden en straffen. Ingeleid, van aantekeningen voorzien en vertaald door Dr JM Michiels. Standaard Wetenschappelijke Uitgeverij, Antwerpen Beccaria C (1986) On crimes, punishments (original edition 1764, translation by D Young). Indianapolis Beck U (2005) Risk society. Towards a new modernity. Sage, London Becker SW (2003) ‘‘Mirror, mirror on the wall’’: Assessing the aftermath of September 11th. Val U L Rev 37:563–626 Becker SW (2005) New developments: increased cooperation between law enforcement and intelligence agencies after September 11. Int Rev Penal Law 76:57–74 Becker SW (2007) Confronting the non-confrontational: reassessing the use of criminal evidence obtained extraterritorially in an age of global law enforcement and intelligence cooperation. Int Rev Penal Law 78:15–33 Becker SW (2008) Closing the door on justice. Secret evidence and the lack of transparency in court proceedings in the wake of the ‘‘war on terrorism’’. In: Becker SW, Derencinovic D (eds) International terrorism: the future unchained? faculty of law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, pp 1–17 Beijer A (2006) Een andere kennismaking met de (wet) afgeschermde getuige. DD 2006 68:959–986 Beijer A, Bokhorst RJ, Boone M, Brants CH, Lindeman JMW (2004) De wet bijzondere opsporingsbevoegdheden – eindevaluatie. WODC, Ministerie van Justitie/Boom Juridische uitgevers, Meppel Bekke AJGM, De Vries J (2007) U bent herkend. Aantreden en optreden van de nationaal coördinator terrorismebestrijding NCTb, Rapport Evaluatie NCTb, Apeldoorn/Leiden Berkhout-van Poelgeest AM (2001) Enkele vragen over de legaliteit in het strafproces (artikel 1 Sv). In: Brants CH et al (eds) Legitieme strafvordering. Intersentia, Antwerpen, pp 23–36 Besselink LFM, Wessel RA (2009) De invloed van ontwikkelingen in de internationale rechtsorde op de doorwerking naar Nederlands constitutioneel recht. Een ‘neo-monistische’ benadering. Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn Blaau LC (1990) The Rechtsstaat idea compared with the rule of law as a paradigm for protecting rights. S African L J 107:76–96 Bleichrodt E (2006) Chapter 11. Freedom from retrospective effect of penal legislation. In: van Dijk P et al (eds) Theory and practice of the European convention on human rights. Intersentia, Antwerpen, pp 651–662 Blom T (2007) Een ernstige inbreuk op de rechtsorde. DD 2007 51:626–638 Bloom R, Dunn WJ (2006) The constitutional infirmity of warrantless NSA surveillance the abuse of presidential power and the injury to the fourth amendment. Wm Mary Bill Rts J 15:147–202 Blum GL, Eclavea RP, Jacobs AJ, Surette EC (2010) III. Electronic surveillance. In: Wiretapping F Execution of warrant or order, 2 minimization. Am Jur 2d Searches and Seizures. 68:412–415 para

Bibliography

655

Boettke PJ, Oprea R (2004) The rule of law. In: Rowley C (ed) The encyclopedia of public choice, vol II. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 507–510 Bokhorst RJ, De Kogel CH, Van der Meij CFM (2002) Evaluatie van de Wet BOB–fase 1. De eerste praktijkervaringen met de Wet Bijzondere opsporingsbevoegdheden. WODC, Ministerie van Jusitie, The Hague Borgers MJ (2003) Rechtsstatelijkheid, doelmatigheid en transparantie van de strafrechtspleging. NJB 2003 11:553–556 Borgers MJ (2007) De vlucht naar voren (inaugural lecture amsterdam VU). Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague Borgers MJ (2009) Het opsporingsbegrip anno 2009. In: Borgers MJ et al (eds) Politie in beeld. Liber amicorum Jan Naeyé. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 27–64 Borgers MJ (2011) De onderzoeksfase: toezicht, controle en opsporing. In: Kristen FGH et al (eds) Bijzonder strafrecht. Strafrechtelijke handhaving van sociaal-economisch en fiscaal recht in Nederland. Boom Lemma uitgevers, The Hague, pp 455–496 Borgers M, Van Sliedregt E (2009) The meaning of the precautionary principle for the assessment of criminal measures in the fight against terrorism. Erasmus L Rev 2(2):171–195 Brants CH, Rignalda A (2010/2011) Issues of convergence: inquisitorial prosecution in England and wales? Preadvies voor de Nederlandse vereniging voor rechtsvergelijking. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Brants CH, Van Lent L (2001) Externe openbaarheid. Van vanzelfsprekendheid tot probleem. In: Brants CH et al (eds) Legitieme strafvordering, Rechten van de mens als inspiratie in de 21ste eeuw. Intersentia Rechtswetenschappen, Antwerpen, pp 75–101 Brants CH, Field S, Jörg N (1995) Are inquisitorial and adversarial systems converging? In: Fennell P et al (eds) Criminal justice in Europe. A comparative study. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 41–56 Brants CH, Mevis PAM, Prakken E (2001) Legitieme strafvordering, rechten van de mens als inspiratie in de 21ste eeuw. Intersentia Rechtswetenschappen, Antwerpen Brants CH, Mevis PAM, Prakken E, Reijntjes JM (2003) Op zoek naar grondslagen. In: Brants CH et al (eds) Op zoek naar grondslagen. Strafvordering 2001 ter discussie. Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague, pp 1–27 Brinkhoff S (2008) Anoniem melden startinformatie voor een strafrechtelijk onderzoek? NJB 2008 20:1224–1228 Brinkhoff S (2009) Controle op de criminele inlichtingeneenheden. DD 2009 10:112–139 Brouwer JG (2006) Van nachtbrakers tot terroristen. Over persoonsgericht verstoren (inaugural lecture Groningen). http://redes.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2006/j.g.brouwer/Brouwer.pdf.. Accessed 28 April 2011 Buruma Y (2001) Buitengewone opsporingsmethoden. WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Deventer Buruma Y (2004) Acht nieuwe wetten. De zin en onzin van gegevensbescherming. DD 2004 51:665–675 Buruma Y (2007) Formele bevoegdheden. In: Fijnaut CJCF et al (eds) Politie. Studies over haar werking en organisatie. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 525–558 Casey T (2008) Electronic surveillance and the right to be secure. U C Davis L Rev 41:977–1033 Cole D, Dempsey JX (2006) Terrorism and the constitution. Sacrificing civil liberties in the name of national security. The New Press, New York Cole D, Lobel J (2007) Less safe less free. Why america is losing the war on terror. The New Press, New York Coomans F, Kamminga M (2007) Rechten van de mens. In: Horbach N et al (eds) Handboek international recht. TMC Asser Press, The Hague, pp 469–507 Cooper Blum S (2009) What really is at stake with the FISA amendments act of 2008 and ideas for future surveillance reform. B U Pub Int L J 18:269–314 Coquillete DR et al (eds) (2007) Moore’s federal practice—criminal. Matthew Bender & Company Inc., Newark Corstens GJM (2005a) Dijkdoorbraken in de strafrechtspleging. NJB 2005 6:289

656

Bibliography

Corstens GJM (2005b) Het Nederlands strafprocesrecht. Kluwer, Arnhem Corstens GJM (2008) Het Nederlands Strafprocesrecht. Kluwer, Deventer Corstens GJM, Borgers MJ (2011) Het Nederlands Strafprocesrecht. Kluwer, Deventer Coster van Voorhout JEB (2006) Intelligence as legal evidence. Comparative criminal research into the viability of the proposed Dutch scheme of shielded witnesses in England and Wales, and legislative compliance with Article 6 (3) (d) ECHR. Utrecht L Rev 2(2):119–143 Coveny AC (2007) When the immovable object meets the unstoppable force. Search and seizure in the age of terrorism. Am J Trial Advoc 31:329–387 Crocker ThP (2008) Overcoming necessity: torture and the state of constitutional culture. SMU L Rev 61:221–279 Damaška MR (1973) Evidentiary barriers to conviction and two models of criminal procedure. A comparative study. U Pa L Rev 121:506–589 Damaška MR (1986) The faces of justice and state authority, a comparative approach to the legal process. Yale University Press, New Haven De Busser E (2009) Data protection in EU and US criminal cooperation. A substantive law approach to the EU internal and transatlantic cooperation in criminal matters between judicial and law enforcement authorities. Maklu, Antwerpen De Hoog D (2008) Politiële terrorismebestrijding in Nederland: inrichting en uitdagingen van een bijzondere politietaak. In: Muller ER et al (eds) Terrorisme. Studies over terrorisme en terrorismebestrijding. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 579–612 De Moor-van Vugt A (1994) Maten en gewichten. Het evenredigheidsbeginsel in Europees perspectief (diss. Tilburg). WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Zwolle De Poot CJ, Bokhorst RJ, Smeenk WH, Kouwenberg RF (2008) De opsporing verruimd? De wet opsporing terroristische misdrijven een jaar in werking. Cahier 2008–9 WODC, Ministerie van Justitie, The Hague De Roos TA (2006) Kroniek van het straf(proces)recht. NJB 2006 31:1743–1752 De Roos TA (2010) Het gedoogakkoord en het repressieve veiligheidsbeleid, NJBlog 25 Oktober. http://njblog.nl/2010/10/25/het-gedoogakkoord-en-het-repressieve-veiligheidsbeleid. Accessed 2 May 2011 De Young K, Fletcher MA (2010) US was more focused on al-Qaeda’s plans abroad than for homeland, report on airline bomb plot finds. Washington Post, January 8, 2010 Deelman P, Gunther Moor LGH (2010) Verschraalt de rol van de politie in het huidige integrale veiligheidsbeleid? Strafblad 2010 5:368–375 afl Dinh VD (2002) Foreword: freedom and security after September 11. Harv J L Pub Pol’y 25:399–406 Donohue LK (2008) The costs of counterterrorism, power, politics and liberty. Cambridge University Press, New York Dripps DA (2003) Terror and tolerance: criminal justice for the new age of anxiety. Ohio St J Crim L 1:9–43 Duncan RM Jr (2004) Surreptitious search warrants and the USA PATRIOT Act: ‘‘Thinking outside the box but within the constitution’’, or a violation of fourth amendment protections? NY City L Rev 7:1–38 Dworkin RM (1979) Taking rights seriously. Harvard University Press, Cambridge Dworkin RM (2006) Is democracy possible here? Principles for a new political debate. Princeton University Press, Princeton Dycus S, Banks WC, Raven-Hansen P (2007a) Counterterrorism law. Aspen Publishers, New York Dycus S, Berney AL, Banks WC, Raven-Hansen P (2007b) National security law. Aspen Publishers, New York Elliff JT (1984) Symposium: national security and civil liberties: the attorney general’s guidelines for FBI investigations. Cornell L Rev 69:785–815 Elzinga DJ, Van Rest PHS, De Valk J (1995) Het Nederlandse Politierecht. WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Zwolle

Bibliography

657

Etzioni A (2004) How patriotic is the Patriot Act? Freedom versus security in the age of terrorism. Routledge, New York Feld BC (2011) T.L.O. and reddings unanswered (Misanswered) fourth amendment questions: few rights and fewer remedies. Miss L J 80:847–954 Fenske D (2008) All enemies, foreign and domestic. Erasing the distinction between foreign and domestic intelligence gathering under the fourth amendment. Nw U L Rev 102:343–381 Feuth T (2002) Het verkennend onderzoek in strafzaken. Kluwer, Alphen aan de Rijn Finn JE (1991) Constitutions in crisis. Political violence and the rule of law. Oxford University Press, Oxford Fokkens JW, Kirkels-Vrijman N (2009) De artikelen 2 politiewet 1993 en 141 en 142 Strafvordering als basis voor opsporingsbevoegdheden. In: Borgers MJ et al (eds) Politie in beeld. Liber amicorum Jan Naeyé. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 105–124 Foqué R, Hart ‘t AC (1990) Instrumentaliteit en rechtsbescherming. Grondslagen van een strafrechtelijke waardendiscussie. Gouda Quint, Arnhem Forgang JD (2009) ‘‘The right of the people’’: the NSA, the FISA amendments act of 2008, and foreign intelligence surveillance of americans overseas. Fordham L Rev 78:217–266 Franken AA (2004a) Voor de vorm (inaugural lecture Utrecht). Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague Franken AA (2004b) Een effectief middel tegen vormverzuimen? In: Duyx PD, van Zeben PDJ (eds) Via straatsburg. Liber amicorum egbert myer. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 207–220 Franken AA (2006) De rol van de rechter-commissaris: tussen ideaal en praktijk. DD 2006 14:266–276 Franken AA (2008) Strafrechtswetenschappen en terrorismebestrijding. DD 2008 1:1–14 Franken AA (2009) Proportionaliteit en subsidiariteit in de opsporing. DD 2009 8:79–92 Garland D (2001) The culture of control. Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford University Press, New York Glashausser A (2008) Treaties as domestic law in the United States. In: Miller RA, Bratspies RM (eds) Progress in international law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden, pp 219–242 Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (2003) United States Department of Justice, The National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, Solutions and approaches for a cohesive plan to improve our nation’s ability to develop and share criminal intelligence. http://www.iir.com/ GLOBAL/ncisp.htm. Accessed 24 Nov 2009 Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (2006) United States Department of Justice, ‘Fusion Center Guidelines, Developing and Sharing Information and Intelligence in a New Era, Guidelines for Establishing and Operating Fusion Centers at the Local, State, and Federal Levels, Executive Summary. http://www.iir.com/GLOBAL/ncisp.htm. Accessed 24 Nov 2009 Goldschmidt JE (2005) Mag het iets minder zijn? Hebben we een teveel aan mensenrechten? (Inaugural lecture utrecht). Universiteit Utrecht, Studie – en informatiecentrum mensenrechten (SIM), Utrecht Griffiths J (1970) Ideology in criminal procedure or a third ‘‘Model’’ of the criminal process. Yale L J 79:359–417 Groenhuijsen MS (1991) Naar een geïntegreerde herziening van het wetboek van strafvordering. In: Doorenbos DR, en Verweij RJ (eds) Hercodificatie wetboek van strafvordering. Tijd voor een integrale herziening? Ars Aequi Libri 1991, Nijmegen, pp 35–60 Groenhuijsen MS, Knigge G (eds) (2001) Het onderzoek ter zitting. Onderzoeksproject strafvordering 2001. Eerste interimrapport. Gouda Quint, Deventer Groenhuijsen MS, Kooijmans T (2010) Probleemoplossing door voortschrijdende wetgeving in het strafrecht? DD 2010 25:419–457 Groenhuijsen M, Simmelink J (2008) Criminal procedure in the Netherlands. In: Vogler R, Huber B (eds) Criminal procedure in Europe. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, pp 373–481 Guiora NA (2008) Military Commissions and National Security Courts after Guantánamo. Nw U L Rev Colloquy 103:199–208

658

Bibliography

Habermas J (1996) Between facts and norms, contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy (original edition 1992, translated by William Rehg). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge Handboek voor de opsporingspraktijk (2000–2007) Openbaar Ministerie. Sdu Uitgevers, The Hague Harr JS, Hess KM (2002) Constitutional law and the criminal justice system. Wadsworth/ Thomson Learning, Belmont Hart ‘t AC (1983) Strafrecht en beleid. Essays. WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Zwolle Hart ‘t AC (1994) Openbaar ministerie en rechtshandhaving. Een verkenning. Gouda Quint, Arnhem Hart HLA (2008) Punishment and responsibility. Essays in the philosophy of law. Oxford University Press, New York Herman SN (2006) The USA PATRIOT Act and the Submajoritarian Fourth Amendment. Harv CR-CL L Rev 41:67–132 Hielkema J (2005) De rechter-commissaris in strafzaken: leidender of lijdelijker? In: Harteveld A et al (eds) Systeem in ontwikkeling. Liber amicorum G. Knigge. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 259–271 Hirsch Ballin MFH (2008) An inside view of dutch counterterrorism strategy. Countering terrorism through criminal law and the presumption of innocence. J Inst Just Int’l Stud 8:139–151 Hirsch Ballin MFH (2009) ‘Een vreemde eend in de bijt van de opsporing’. DD 2009 22:281–302 Hirsch Ballin MFH (2012) Terrorism causing a shifting responsibility in criminal pre-trial investigation: from repression to prevention. In: van Coster Voorhout J et al (eds) Shifting responsibilities in criminal justice. Critical portrayals of the changing role and content of a fragmented globalizing law domain. Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague (forthcoming) Hirsch Ballin MFH (2012) National security, international privacy and transnational data exchange. In: Scott Smith GP (ed) Obama, US Politics, and transatlantic relations: change or continuity? PIE-Peter Lang, Brussels (forthcoming) Hitz FP (2002) Responses to the September 11 attacks. Unleashing the rogue elephant. September 11 and letting the CIA be the CIA. Harv J L Pub Pol’y 25:765–780 Hobbes Th (1998) Leviathan (reprinted, original edition 1651), edited with an introduction and notes by JCA Gaskin. Oxford University Press, New York Hoffman B (2006) Inside terrorism. Columbia University Press, New York Howell BA (2006) Foreign intelligence surveillance act: has the solution become a problem? In: Northhouse C (ed) Protecting what matters, technology, security and liberty since 9/11. Brookings Institution Press/Computer Ethics Institute, Washington Huster S, Rudolph K (2008) Vom Rechtsstaat zum präventionsstaat (reprinted). Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main Ignatieff M (2005) The lesser evil. Political ethics in an age of terror. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh Israel JH (1993) Cornerstones of the judicial process. 2-SPG Kan J L Pub Pol’y 5–22 Israel JH, Kamisar Y, LaFave WR, King NJ (2006) Criminal procedure and the constitution. Leading supreme court cases and introductory text, 2006 edition. West a Thomson Business, St Paul Israel JH, LaFave WR (2006) Criminal procedure, constitutional limitations, In a nutshell. Thomson/West, St Paul Jackson AL, Brown M (2007) Ensuring efficiency, interagency cooperation, and protection of civil liberties. Shifting from a traditional model of policing to an intelligence-led policing (ILP) paradigm. Crim Justice Stud 20(2):111–129 Jones A (2009) The 2008 FBI guidelines: contradiction of original purpose. B U Pub Int L J 19:137–174

Bibliography

659

Keijzer N (1987) Enkele opmerkingen omtrent de praesumptio innocentiae in strafzaken. In: Enschedé CJ et al (eds) Naar eer en geweten. Liber amicorum journal remmelink. Gouda Quint, Arnhem, pp 235–253 Kelk C (1995) Criminal justice in the Netherlands. In: Fennell P et al (eds) Criminal justice in Europe: a comparative study. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 1–20 Kinports K (2009) Diminishing probable cause and minimalist searches. Ohio St J Crim L 6:649–660 Spring Knigge G (2005) Verdachte en verdenking. In: Jordaans AHEC et al (eds) Praktisch strafrecht, Liber amicorum J.M. Reijntjes. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 351–365 Knigge G, Kwakman NJM (2001) Het opsporingsbegrip en de normering van de opsporingstaak. In: Groenhuijsen MS, Knigge G (eds) Het vooronderzoek in Strafzaken. Tweede interimrapport onderzoeksproject strafvordering 2001. Gouda Quint, Deventer, pp 125–347 Krauß D (1971) Der Grundsatz der Unschuldsvermutung im Strafverfahren. In: Müller-Dietz H (ed) strafrechtsdogmatik und kriminalpolitik. Carl Heymanns Verlag KG, Köln/Berlin/Bonn/ München, pp 153–178 Krips F (2009) Over de bruikbaarheid van AIVD-informatie in strafzaken. In: Scheltema A, Scheltema M, Dekerelaere K, Delvauw M, Tormans S, Krips F, Winants A, Kortmann J, Sieburgh C, Cauffman C, Weyts B (eds) Preadviezen 2009. Toezicht op de financiële markt en de energiemarkt. Staatsgeheimen en het strafproces. Rechtshandhaving door het privaatrecht (Vereniging voor de vergelijkende studie van het recht van België en Nederland). Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague, pp 129–194 Kris DS (2006) The rise and fall of the FISA wall’. Stan L & Pol’y Rev 17:487–529 Kris DS (2011) ‘Law enforcement as counterterrorism tool’. J Nat’l Security L Pol’y 5:1–95 Kris DS, Wilson JD (2007) National security investigations and prosecutions. Thomson/West, Eagan Krommendijk M, Terpstra J, Van Kempen PH (2009) De wet BOB: titels IVa en V in de praktijk, besluitvorming over bijzondere opsporingsbevoegdheden in de aanpak van georganiseerde criminaliteit. Boom Juridische uitgevers/WODC, Ministerie van Justitie, The Hague Kuijer M (2005) Van lawless naar een rechtmatige bestrijding van terrorisme (inaugural lecture Amsterdam VU). Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen LaFave WR (2003) Principles of criminal law. West Group, St Paul LaFave WR, Israel JH, King NJ (2004) Criminal procedure, fourth edition. West a Thomson business, St Paul Lawson RA (1999) ‘De internationale rechter en de Nederlandse rechtsorde’, in Handelingen NJV 129e jaargang/1999-I, internationale rechtspraak in de Nederlandse rechtsorde, WEJ Tjeenk Willink, Deventer, 1–132 Lawson Mack R, Kelly MJ (2004) Equal justice in the balance. America’s legal responses to the emerging terrorist threat. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor Lazarus L, Goold B (2007) Introduction, security and human rights: the search for a language of reconciliation. In: Goold BJ, Lazarus L (eds) Security and human rights. Hart Publishing, Portland, pp 1–24 Lindenberg K (2002) Van ort tot oro. Een verzameling van de werken die hebben geleid tot het oorspronkelijk regeringsontwerp van een nieuw Wetboek van strafvordering (1914). Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen Lintz JM (2007) De plaats van de Wet terroristische misdrijven in het materiële strafrecht. Een onderzoek naar de wederzijdse beïnvloeding door de Wet terroristische misdrijven en het wetboek van strafrecht en enkele bijzondere wetten (diss. Rotterdam). Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Lipton E, Schmitt E, Mazzetti M (2010) Review of jet bomb shows more missed clues, New York Times, January 18, 2010 Lobel J (2002) The war on terrorism and civil liberties. Univ Pitt L Rev 63:767–790 Locke J (1980) The second treatise of government (original edition 1690, edited by CB Macpherson), Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis

660

Bibliography

Loof JP (2000) Mag de overheid op zoek gaan naar de grenzen van haar bevoegdheid als daarbij de grondrechten in het geding zijn? NJCM-Bulletin 2000 25(2):666–667 Loof JP (2005) Mensenrechten en staatsveiligheid: verenigbare grootheden? Opschorting en beperking van mensenrechtenbescherming tijdens noodtoestanden en andere situaties die de staatsveiligheid bedreigen. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Luban D (2002) The war on terrorism and the end of human rights. Phil & Pub Poly Q 22:9–14 Luban D (2007) Legal ethics and human dignity. Cambridge University Press, New York Luban D, O’Sullivan JR, Stewart DP (2010) International and transnational criminal law. Aspen Publishers, New York Luchtman MJJP (2007a) Grensoverschrijdende sfeercumulatie. Over de handhavingssamenwerking tussen financiële toezichthouders, fiscale autoriteiten en justitiële autoriteiten in EU-verband (diss. Utrecht). Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Luchtman MJJP (2007b) Sfeercumulatie in het verkeersrecht en het fiscale recht. DD 2007 53:657–681 Luchtman MJJP (2008) European cooperation between financial supervisory authorities, tax authorities and judicial authorities. Intersentia, Antwerpen Luna E (2009) Criminal justice and the public imagination. Ohio St J Crim L 7:71–147 Manning PK (1977) Police work. The social organization of policing. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge Marcus P (1998) Symposium: the challenge of prosecuting organized crime in the United States. Procedural issues, XVI international congress of penal law, report submitted by the American National Section, AIDP: topic III: criminal procedure. Wayne L Rev 44:1379–1400 Mart SN (2008) The chains of the constitution and legal process in the library. A post-USA Patriot Reauthorization Act Assessment. Okla City U L Rev 33:435–503 Martin K (2002) Intelligence, terrorism and civil liberties. Human Rights, Winter 2002, 5–7 Mauriello TP (2007) Criminal investigation handbook. Mathew Bender & Company Inc, Newark McConell JM (2008) Vision 2015. A globally networked and integrated intelligence enterprise, Report of the director of national intelligence, Washington. http://www.dni.gov/reports.htm. Accessed 4 Aug 2011 McCormack W (2007) Understanding the law of terrorism. LexisNexis, Newark McCormack W (2008) Values implicated in the struggle with terrorism: war, Crime and Prevention. In: Karawan IA et al (eds) Values and violence, intangible aspects of terrorism. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 257–277 McCormack W (2010) Prosecuting terrorism. Models for confronting organized violence. SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1623847. Accessed 12 Aug 2011 McLaughlin K (2007) The fourth amendment and cell phone location tracking: where are we? Hastings Comm Ent L J 19:421–445 Mégret F (2010) Nature of obligations. In: Moeckli D et al (eds) International human rights law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 124–149 Mevis PAM (2005a) Strafrecht, EVRM en grondwet. Enkele gedachten over het belang, de ontwikkeling en de versterking van een algemeen toetsingskader voor veranderingen binnen het strafrecht. In: Jordaans AHEC et al (eds) Praktisch strafrecht. Liber amicorum J.M. Reijntjes. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 453–469 Mevis PAM (2005b) De evaluatie van de wet BOB en van de wet herziening GVO. DD 2005 32:452–466 Mevis PAM (2009a) Nuttig recht op een eerlijk proces in de Grondwet. DD 2009 1:1–18 Mevis PAM (2009b) Wetsvoorstel versterking rol RC: toch maar doen. DD 2009 50:652–688 Moore K (2007) The role of federal criminal prosecutions in the war on terrorism. Lewis Clark L Rev 11:837–849 Muller ER (2007) Inlichtingendiensten in Nederland. In: Fijnaut CJCF et al (eds) Politie. Studies over haar werking en organisatie. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 169–190

Bibliography

661

Muller ER, Kummeling HRBM, Bron RP (2007a) Veiligheid en privacy. Een zoektocht naar een nieuwe balans. Boom Juridische Uitgevers/COT Instituut voor Veiligheids – en Crisismanagement/Universiteit Utrecht, Den Haag Muller ER (2008) Trends in terrorisme en terrorismebestrijding. In: Muller ER et al (eds) Terrorisme. Studies over terrorisme en terrorismebestrijding. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 903–917 Muller ER, Dubelaar MJ, Cleiren CPM (2007b) Algemene beginselen van behoorlijke politiezorg. In: Fijnaut CJCF et al (eds) Politie. Studies over haar werking en organisatie. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 559–599 Muller ER, Rogier LJJ, Kummeling HRBM, Dammen R, Bron RP, Woltjer AJTh, Kalkhoven VC (2007b) Bestuur, recht en veiligheid. Bestuursrechtelijke bevoegdheden voor openbare orde handhaving en terrorismebestrijding, Onderzoeksrapport COT Instituut voorVeiligheids – en Crisismanagement, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en Universiteit Utrecht. http://www. rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-enpublicaties/kamerstukken/2008/04/24/kabinetsstandpuntrapport-bestuur-recht-en-veiligheid.html. Accessed 3 May 2011 Musch DJ (2003) Civil liberties and the foreign intelligence surveillance act, fourteenth volume, second series. terrorism: document of international and local control, oceana publications, Inc, Dobbs Ferry, NY. Myjer E (1997) De verdachte jager zonder stukken, EHRM 18 maart 1997, Fouchier t. Frankrijk, ann. E. Myer, NJCM-Bulletin 1997, 22(6):734–742 Myjer E (1997) De verdachte jager zonder stukken, EHRM 18 maart 1997, Fouchier t. Frankrijk, ann. E. Myer. NJCM Bull 1997, 22(6):734–742 Nakashima E (2010) White house proposal would ease FBI access to records of internet activity. Washington Post, 29 July 2010 Nakashima E (2010) Plaintiff who challenged FBI’s national security letters reveals concerns. Washington Post, 10 Aug 2010 Nieland AE (2007) National Security Letters and the Amended Patriot Act. Cornell L Rev 92:1201–1236 Nokes SE (2011) Redefining the supremacy clause in the global age: reconciling medellin with original intent. Wm Mary Bill Rts J 19:829–855 Nowak JE, Rotunda RD (2004) Constitutional law. 7th edn. West, a thomson business, St Paul Nowak JE, Rotunda RD (2005) Principles of constitutional law. West, a Thomson Business, St Paul O’Harrow R Jr (2002) Six weeks in autumn. Washington Post Magazine, October 27, 2002 Ölçer FP (2008) Eerlijk proces en bijzondere opsporing. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Ölçer FP (2010) Preventief fouilleren zonder redelijk vermoeden van schuld, EHRM 12 januari 2010, Gillan en Quinton v. Het Verenigd Koninkrijk, appl. nr. 4158/05. Strafblad 2010 1:21–30 afl Orth JV (2003) Due process of law, a brief history. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence Packer H (1966) The courts, the police, and the rest of US. J Crim L Criminol Pol Sci 57(238): 238–243 Parry JT (2007) Terrorism and the new criminal process. Wm Mary Bill Rts J 15:765–835 Pati R (2009) Due process and international terrorism. An international legal analysis. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden Peçi I, Sikkema E (2008) De rechtsbeschermende functie van het opsporingsbegrip. In: Franken AA, de Langen M, Moerings M (eds) Constante waarden. Liber amicorum prof. mr. Constantijn Kelk. Boom Juridische Uitgevers, The Hague, pp 353–362 Perrine JB (2005) The USA PATRIOT Act: big brother or business as usual? Notre Dame J L Ethics Pub Pol’y 19:163–195 Peters AAG (1999) Het rechtskarakter van het strafrecht. In: Buruma Y (ed) 100 jaar strafrecht. Klassieke teksten van de twintigste eeuw. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, pp 271–287 Pfeiffer C (2004) Feeling insecure? United States v. Bin laden and the merits of a foreignintelligence exception for searches abroad. Rev Litig 23:209–237 Podgor ES (2004) Department of justice guidelines: balancing ‘‘Discretionary Justice’’. Cornell J L Pub Pol’y 13:167–202, Spring

662

Bibliography

Pompe WPJ (1959) Vooronderzoek of eindonderzoek beslissend? TvSTvS 1959:141–151 Pompe WPJ (2008) ‘De persoon des daders in het strafrecht. Rede uitgesproken bij de aanvaarding van het hoogleraarsambt aan de Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht op 8 oktober 1928’. In: Gedachten van Willem Pompe over de mens in het strafrecht. Willem Pompe Instituut/ Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague Position paper Barack Obama (2008) Barack Obama: the war we need to win, Obama’s plan to defeat terrorism worldwide. http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/CounterterrorismFactSheet. pdf. Accessed 25 Oct 2010 Posner R (2006) Not a suicide pact. The constitution in a time of national emergency. Oxford University Press, Oxford Posner EA, Vermeule A (2007) Terror in the balance. Security, liberty and the courts. Oxford University Press, Oxford Power RC (2010) ‘‘Intelligence’’ searches and purpose: a significant mismatch between constitutional criminal procedure and the law of intelligence-gathering. Pace L Rev 30: 620–687 Prakken E (2004) ‘Naar een cyclopisch (straf)recht’. NJB 2004 45/46:2338–2344 Progress Report (2011) Implementing 9/11 commission recommendations. US Department of Homeland Security Priest D, Arkin WM (2010) ‘Top secret America, a Washington Post investigation’, Washington Post, July 19, 2010 Ramraj VV (2007) Between idealism and pragmatism. Legal and political constraints on state power in times of crisis. In: Goold B, Lazarus L (eds) Security and human rights. Hart, Oxford, pp 185–202 Rawls J (1993) Political liberalism. Columbia University Press, New York Reijntjes JM (2001) De toekomst van het voorbereidend onderzoek. DD 2001 31:264–284 Reijntjes JM (2006) Minkenhof’s Nederlandse strafvordering. Kluwer, Deventer Reis H (1970) Kant’s political writings (edited with an introduction and notes by hans reiss, Translated by HN Nisbet). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Risen J, Lichtblau E (2005) Bush lets U.S. spy on callers without courts, New York Times, December 16, 2005. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html. Accessed July 29, 2011 Rivers J (2006) Proportionality and variable intensity of review. Cambridge L Jo 65:174–207 Rodley NS (2010) Integrity of the person. In: Moeckli D et al (eds) International human rights law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 209–232 Rosand E (2004) Security council resolution 1373 and the counter—Terrorism committee: the cornerstone of the United Nations contribution to the fight against terrorism. In: Fijnaut C et al (eds) Legal instruments in the fight against international terrorism. A transatlantic dialogue. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston, pp 603–632 Rosenfeld M (2001) The rule of law and the legitimacy of constitutional democracy. S Cal L Rev 74:1307–1350 Roth MJ (2009) Berkemer revisited: uncovering the middle ground between Miranda and the New Terry. Fordham L Rev 77:2779–2833 Rozemond N (1998) Strafvorderlijke rechtsvinding (diss. Amsterdam VU). Gouda Quint, Deventer Rozemond N (2000) Voorafgaande beschouwingen in de strafrechtspraak van de Hoge Raad. NJB 2000 13:706–712 Rozemond N (2003) De moraal van het strafrecht. DD 2003 33:595–613 Rozemond N (2006) Strafrechtelijke belangenafweging in de risicosamenleving. RMThemis 4:160–168 Sales NA (2007) Secrecy and national security investigations. Ala L Rev 58:811–884 Saul B (2006) Defining terrorism in international law. Oxford University Press, New York Savage Ch (2011) Delayed miranda warning ordered for terror suspects. New York Times, March 24, 2011

Bibliography

663

Schalken T (2006) De jurist en de kunstenaar. Waar het verschil in denkstijlen toe kan leiden. NJB 2006 02:70–73 Schulhofer SJ (2005) Rethinking the patriot act. The Century Foundation Press, New York Sen A (2010) The idea of justice. Penguin Books, New York Senna JJ, Siegel LJ (1998) Essentials of criminal justice. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont Schmitt C (2005) Political theory, four chapters on the concept of sovereignty (original edition 1922, translated by George Schwab). University of Chicago Press, Chicago Shumate BA (2006) From ‘‘Sneak and Peek’’ to ‘‘Sneak and Steal’’. Section 213 of the USA PATRIOT act. Regent U L Rev 19:203–234 Sidel M (2004) More secure less free? Antiterrorism policy & civil liberties after September 11. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor Sikkema E (2008) Aantekeningen op art. 27 (suppl. 169, oktober 2008). In: Melai/Groenhuijsen et al (eds) Het wetboek van strafvordering. Kluwer, Deventer (losbladig) Simmelink JBHM (1987) De rechtsstaatgedachte achter art. 1 Sv. Gedachten over de betekenis van art. 1 Sv voor het handelen van de overheid in de opsporingsfase. Gouda Quint, Arnhem Simmelink JBHM, Baaijens-van Geloven YGM (2001) Vervolging en rechtsbescherming. In: Groenhuijsen MS, Knigge G (eds) Het vooronderzoek in strafzaken. Tweede interimrapport onderzoeksproject Strafvordering 2001. Gouda Quint, Deventer, pp 387–496 Simmons R (2010) Searching for terrorists. Why public safety is not a special need. Duke L J 59:843–927 Slobogin C (2007) The liberal assault on the fourth amendment. Ohio St J Crim L 4:603–618 Smith JC (2003) The USA PATRIOT Act: violating reasonable expectations of privacy protected by the fourth amendment without advancing national security. N C L Rev 82:412–455 Snider B (2003) Congressional oversight of intelligence. Some reflections on the last 25 years. Center on Law Ethics and National Security, Durham Special Report of the DoJ’s Office of the Inspector General (2005) Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Compliance with the Attorney General’s Investigative Guidelines, US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, September 2005 Soeteman A (2009) Rechtsbeginselen en positivisme!? R&R 2009 1(38):5–10 Sottiaux S (2008) Terrorism and the limitation of rights. The ECHR and the US constitution. Hart Publishing, Oxford Stuckenberg CF (1997) Untersuchungen zur unschuldsvermutung (diss. Bonn University). Walter de Gruyter & Company, Berlin Stuntz WJ (2002) Local policing after the terror. Yale L J 111:2137–2194 Subin HI, Mirsky IS, Weinstein IS (1993) The criminal process. Prosecution and defense functions. West Publishing Company, St Paul Sunstein CR (2005) Laws of fear. Beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Swire PP (2004) The system of foreign intelligence surveillance law. Geo Wash L Rev 72:1306–1371 Sydejko RJ (2006) International influence on democracy. How terrorism exploited a deteriorating fourth amendment. J L Society 7:220–270 Tamanaha BZ (2004) On the rule of law: history, politics, theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Taslitz AE (2010) What is probable cause, and why should we care? The costs, benefits, and meaning of individualized suspicion. Law Contemp Probs 73:145–210 Trechsel S (2005) Human rights in criminal proceedings. Oxford University Press, Oxford Tsakyrakis S (2008) Proportionality: an assault on human rights. Jean monnet working paper 09/08, available at: http://centers.law.nyu.edu/jeanmonnet/papers/08/080901.pdf. Accessed 12 Aug 2011 Van der Geest C (2008) Van daderschap naar intentie. Is er binnen het strafrecht, door de invoering van artikelen 140, 46 en 80 Sr en de invoering van de Wet Terroristische Misdrijven, sprake van een verschuiving richting intentiestrafrecht? Kennispunt Faculteit Recht, Economie, Bestuur en Organisatie, Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht

664

Bibliography

Van der Meij PPJ (2010a) De driehoeksverhouding in het strafrechtelijk vooronderzoek. Een onverminderde zoektocht naar evenwicht in de rolverdeling tussen de rechter-commissaris, de officier van justitie en de verdediging. Kluwer, Deventer Van der Meij PPJ (2010b) De rechter-commissaris als onmisbare schakel in het vooronderzoek? Trema 8:331–338 Van der Woude MAH (2010) Wetgeving in een Veiligheidscultuur. Totstandkoming van antiterrorismewetgeving in Nederland bezien vanuit maatschappelijke en (rechts)politieke context (diss. Leiden). Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague Van der Woude M, Van Sliedregt E (2007) De risicosamenleving: overheid vs. Strafrechtswetenschap? Aanwijzingen voor het debat rondom veiligheid en risico’s. Proces 2007 6:216–226 Van Gestel B, De Poot CJ, Bokhorst RJ, Kouwenberg RF (2009) Signalen van terrorisme en de opsporingspraktijk. De wet opsporing terroristische misdrijven twee jaar in werking. WODC, Ministerie van Justitie, The Hague Van Gestel B, De Poot CJ, Kouwenberg RF (2010) De wet opsporing terroristische misdrijven drie jaar in werking. WODC, Ministerie van Justitie, The Hague Van Ginkel B (2010) The practice of the United Nations in combating terrorism from 1946 to 2008. Questions of legality and legitimacy (diss. Utrecht). Intersentia, Leiden/Oxford/Portland Van Kempen PHPHMC (2005) Terrorismebestrijding door marginalisering van strafvorderlijke waarborgen. NJB 2005 08:397–400 Van Kempen PHPHMC (2005b) Het conceptwetsvoorstel voorkoming, opsporing en vervolging van terroristische misdrijven. Terrorismebestrijding door marginalisering strafvorderlijke waarborgen. http://www.portill.nl/articles/vankempen/VanKempen_1.PDF. Accessed 13 May 2011 Van Kempen PHPHMC (2008) Repressie door mensenrechten. Over positieve verplichtingen tot aanwending van stafrecht ter bescherming van fundamentele rechten. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Van Kempen PHPHMC, Van de Voort J (2010) Nederlandse antiterrorismeregelgeving getoetst aan fundamentele rechten. Een analyse met meer bijzondere aandacht voor het EVRM. NCTb, WODC, Ministerie van Justitie/Radboud Universiteit, Nijmegen Van Klink B, Lembcke O (2007) ‘Can terrorism be fought within the boundaries of the rule of law? A review of recent literature in political philosophy’. R&R 2007 2:9–26 Van Sliedregt E (2006) Het verdenkingsbegrip. In: Cleiren CPM et al (eds) Jurisprudentie strafrecht select. Sdu Uitgevers, The Hague, pp 1–25 Van Sliedregt E (2009) Ten to one. A contemporary reflection on the presumption of innocence (inaugural lecture Amsterdam VU). Boom Legal Publishers, The Hague Van Westerloo G (2006) Hoge Raad bezorgd over verharding strafklimaat. NRC Handelsblad, 6 May 2006 Van Wifferen L (2007) Terrorisme als gedraging in het strafprocesrecht. In: van Kempen PHPHMC et al (eds) De gedraging in beweging. Handelen en nalaten in het materiële strafrecht, strafprocesrecht en sanctierecht. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 195–209 Van Zuijlen RW (2008) Veiligheid als opdracht. Een onderzoek naar veiligheid als fundamenteel recht en als positieve verplichting van de staat in het licht van de politietaak tot strafrechtelijke rechtshandhaving (diss. Rotterdam). Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen Vellinga-Schootstra F, Vellinga WH (2008) ‘Positive Obligations’ en het Nederlandse straf (proces)recht (inaugural lecture Groningen). Kluwer, Deventer Vermaas P (2011) AIVD en OM. Landelijke terreurofficieren willen informatie delen verbeteren. Opportuun 2:24–27, februari 2011 Verrest PAM (2011) Raison d’être. Een onderzoek naar de rol van de rechter-commissaris in ons strafproces. Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague Verri P (1988) Osservazioni sulla tortura. Rizzoli Libre, Milano Vervaele JAE (2005) ‘Terrorism and information sharing between the intelligence and law enforcement communities in the US and the Netherlands: emergency criminal law?’ Utrecht L Rev 1(1):1–27

Bibliography

665

Vervaele JAE (2008) The anti-terrorist law in the US: criminal law for the enemies. Inter-Am Europ Hum Rights J Revista Interame y Europea de Derechos Humanos 1(1):5–60 Vervaele JAE (2009) Special procedural measures and respect of human rights, general report. Int Rev Penal Law 1–2:75–123 Vervaele JAE (2012) Epilogue. In: van Coster Voorhout J et al (eds) Shifting responsibilities in criminal justice. Critical portrayals of the changing role and content of a fragmented globalizing law domain. Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague Forthcoming Fall Vis T (2010a) De scheiding tussen de politieke inlichtingendienst AIVD en de politie. Strafblad 2010, afl 5:420–428 Vis T (2010b) Het vertrouwen tussen de AIVD en de politie: een brug te ver? In: Gaarthuis RST et al (eds) Vertrouwen in de strafrechtspleging. Kluwer, Deventer, pp 119–137 Vogler R (2008) Introduction. In: Vogler R, Huber B (eds) Criminal procedure in Europe. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, pp 4–38 Walther S (2000) The position and structure of the prosecutor’s office in the United States. Eur J of Crime, Crim L Crim Just 8/1(1):283–295 White JR (2004) Defending the homeland, domestic intelligence, law enforcement and security. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont Winter H (2006) Resurrecting the ‘‘Dead Hand’’ of the common law rule of 1789. Why Terry v. Ohio is in Jeopardy. 45:5 Crim Law Bull 2 Yeh BT, Doyle CH (2006) CRS report for congress. USA PATRIOT Act Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005. A legal analysis, congressional research service (updated December 21st 2006) Zabel RB, Benjamin JJ Jr (2008) In pursuit of justice. Prosecuting terrorism cases in the federal courts. A white paper. Human Rights First 2008 Zabel RB, Benjamin JJ (2009) In pursuit of justice. Prosecuting terrorism cases in the federal courts. 2009 update and recent developments. Human Rights First 2009

Reports

Rapport Evaluatie Antiterrorismemaatregelen (2011) ‘Antiterrorismemaatregelen in Nederland in het eerste decennium van de 21e eeuw. Over totstandkoming, toepassing, beoordeling en aanpassing van antiterrorismemaatregelen in Nederland 2001–2010’, NCTb, Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie, The Hague (Kamerstukken II 2010/11, 29754, nr. 199). Rapport Staatscommissie Grondwet (November 2010), available at: www. staatscommissiegrondwet.nl (accessed 27 January 27 2011) (Kamerstukken II 2010/ 11, 31570, nr. 17). Rapport van de Commissie Bestuurlijke Evaluatie Algemene Inlichtingen—en Veiligheidsdienst (Commission Havermans). De AIVD in verandering (November 2004), available at: https://www.aivd.nl/actueel/aivd-publicaties/ (accessed 12 August 2011) (Kamerstukken II 2004/05, 29876, nr. 1). Rapport van de Commissie Evaluatie Antiterrorismebeleid (Commission Suyver) Naar een integrale evaluatie van antiterrorismemaatregelen (May 2009), available at: http://www.nctb.nl/Images/Rapport_Suyver_tcm91-203904.pdf (accessed 12 August 2011). Rapport van de Commissie van Toezicht betreffende de Inlichtingen—en Veiligheidsdiensten inzake het onderzoek naar de door de AIVD uitgebrachte ambtsberichten in de periode van januari 2004 tot oktober 2005 (2006), CTIVD 9a, The Hague. Rapport van de Commissie van Toezicht betreffende de Inlichtingen—en Veiligheidsdiensten inzake het onderzoek naar de Contra Terrorisme Infobox (2007), CTIVD 12, The Hague. Rapport van de Parlementaire Enquêtecommissie Opsporingsmethoden (Commission Van Traa). Inzake Opsporing (1996), Sdu Uitgevers, The Hague (Kamerstukken II 1995/96, 24 072, nrs. 10–11). Report by the Commissioner for human rights Mr Thomas Hammarberg on his visit to the Netherlands (2009), CommDH 2, available at https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ ViewDoc.jsp?id=1417061 (accessed May 22nd, 2011).

M.F.H. Hirsch Ballin, Anticipative Criminal Investigation, DOI: 10.1007/978-90-6704-843-9, Ó T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author 2012

667

668

Reports

Report by the International Bar Association’s Task Force on International Terrorism. International Terrorism, Legal Challenges and Responses (2003), Transnational Publishers, Ardsley, NY. Report of the Eminent Jurists Panel on Terrorism, Counter—Terrorism and Human Rights. Assessing Damage, Urging Action (2009), The International Commission of Jurists, Geneva. Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States (The 9/11 Commission Report), (2004), available at: http://govinfo.library. unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf (accessed 29 July 2011). Report of the Office of the Inspector General (2003) The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Efforts to Improve the Sharing of Intelligence and Other Information, US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division, Audit Report 04–10, December 2003 (Redacted and unclassified). Report of the Office of the Inspector General (2006) A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Handling of the Brandon Mayfield Case, Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Oversight and Review Division, March 2006. Report of the Office of the Inspector General (2007) A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Use of Section 215 Orders for Business Records, US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, March 2007. Report of the Office of the Inspector General (2007) A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Use of National Security Letters, US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, March 2007 (Unclassified). Report of the Office of the Inspector General (2008) A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Use of National Security Letters, Assessment of Corrective Actions and Examination of NSL usage in 2006, US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, March 2008 (Unclassified). Report of the Office of the Inspector General (2010) A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Use of Exigent Letters and Other Informal Requests for Telephone Records, US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, January 2010. Report of the Office of the Inspector General (2011) A Review of the FBI’s Progress in Responding to the Recommendations of the Office of the Inspector General Report on the Fingerprint Misidentification in the Brandon Mayfield Case, Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, June 2011. Report on the President’s Surveillance Program (2009) (prepared by the Offices of Inspectors General of the Department of Defense), Department of Justice, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Report No. 2009-00013-AS, 10 July 2009 (Unclassified).

List of Cases

European Court of Human Rights ECHR 6 September 1978, App. no. 5029/71 (Klass and others v. Germany). ECHR 26 April 1979, App. no. 6538/74 (Sunday Times v. United Kingdom). ECHR 25 March 1983, App. no. 5947/72; 6205/73; 7052/75; 7061/75; 7107/75; 7113/75; 7136/75 (Silver and Others v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 25 March 1983, App. no. 8660/7 9 (Minelli v. Switzerland). ECHR 2 August 1984, App. no. 8691/79 (Malone v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 26 March 1987, App. no. 9248/81 (Leander v. Sweden). ECHR 12 July 1988, App. no. 10862/84 (Schenk v. Switzerland). ECHR 30 March 1989, App. no. 10461/83 (Chapell v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 20 November 1989, App. no. 11454/85 (Kostovski v. The Netherlands). ECHR 24 April 1990, App. no. 11105/84 (Huvig v. France). ECHR 24 April 1990, App. no. 11801/85 (Kruslin v. France). ECHR 30 August 1990, App. nos. 12244/86; 12245/86; 12383/86 (Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 28 August 1991, App. nos. 11170/84; 12876/87; 13468/87 (Brandstetter v. Austria). ECHR 15 June 1992, App. no. 12433/86 (Lüdi v. Switzerland). ECHR 16 December 1992, App. no. 13071/87 (Edwards v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 16 December 1992, App. no. 13710/88 (Niemietz v. Germany). ECHR 25 May 1993, App. no. 14307/88 (Kokkinakis v. Greece). ECHR 23 June 1993, App. no. 12952/87 (Ruiz-Mateos v. Spain). ECHR 24 November 1993, App. no. 13972/88 (Imbrioscia v. Switzerland). ECHR 27 October 1994, App. no. 18535/91 (Kroon and Others v. The Netherlands). ECHR 28 October 1994, App. no. 14310/88 (Murray v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 22 November 1995, App. nos. 20166/92 and 20190/92 (S.W. and C.R. v. United Kingdom). ECHR 8 February 1996, App. no. 18731/91 (John Murray v. The United Kingdom). M.F.H. Hirsch Ballin, Anticipative Criminal Investigation, DOI: 10.1007/978-90-6704-843-9, Ó T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author 2012

669

670

List of Cases

ECHR 26 March 1996, Reports 1996-II (Doorson v. The Netherlands). ECHR 15 November 1996, App. no. 22414/93 NJ 1997, 301, (Chahal v. UK). ECHR 18 March 1997, Reports 1997-III (Van Mechelen and others v. The Netherlands). ECHR 25 June 1997, App. no. 20605/92 (Halford v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 25 March 1998, App. no. 23224/94 (Kopp v. Switzerland). ECHR 30 July 1998, App. no. 27671/95 (Valenzuela Contreras v. Spain). ECHR 24 August 1998, App. no. 23618/94 (Lambert v. France). ECHR 9 June 1998, App. no. 25829/94 (Teixeira de Castro v. Portugal). ECHR 23 September 1998, App. no. 24755/94 (McLeod v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 28 October 1998, App. no. 23452/94 (Osman v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 16 February 2000, App. no. 27798/95 (Amann v. Switzerland). ECHR 16 February 2000, App. no. 28901/95 (Rowe and Davis v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 4 May 2000, App. no. 28341/95 (Rotaru v. Romania). ECHR 12 May 2000, App. no. 35394/97 (Khan v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 10 October 2000, App. nos. 22947/93 and 22948/93 (Akkoç v. Turkey). ECHR 3 April 2001, App. no. 27229/95 (Keenan v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 5 July 2001, App. no. 41087/98 (Phillips v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 25 September 2001, App. no. 44787/98 (P.G. and J.H. v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 16 October 2001, App. no. 37555/97 (O’Hara v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 24 April 2003, App. no. 24351/94 (Aktasß v. Turkey). ECHR 28 October 2003 App. no. 44320/98 (Baars v. The Netherlands). ECHR 22 July 2003, App. no. 39647/98 and 40461/98 (Edwards and Lewis v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 24 June 2004, App. no. 59320/00 (Von Hannover v. Germany). ECHR 28 October 2004, Requêtes nos 48173/99 et 48319/99 (Y.B. et autres c. Turquie). ECHR 10 November 2005, App. no. 54789/00 (Bocos-Cuesta v. The Netherlands). ECHR 17 November 2005, admissibility decision, App. no. 73047/01 (Monika Haas v. Germany). ECHR 29 June 2006, admissibility decision, App. no. 45934/00 (Weber and Saravia v. Germany). ECHR 6 February 2007, App. no. 14348/02 (Garycki v. Poland). ECHR 25 October 2007, App. no. 38258/03 (Van Vondel v. The Netherlands). ECHR 1 July 2008, App. no. 58243/00 (Liberty and others v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 12 January 2010, App. no. 4158/05 (Gillan and Quinton v. The United Kingdom). ECHR 2 September 2010, App. no. 35623/05 (Uzun v. Germany). ECHR 14 September 2010, App. no. 38224/03 (Sanoma Uitgevers B.V. v. The Netherlands).

Inter-American Court of Human Rights IACHR 29 July 1988, Series C No. 4 (Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras).

List of Cases

Supreme Court of the Netherlands HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR

20 december 1926, NJ 1927, 85. 2 december 1935, NJ 1936, 250, ann. WP. 26 juni 1962, NJ 1962, 470, ann. WP. 14 januari 1975, NJ 1975, 207. 12 december 1978, NJ 1979, 142, ann. GEM. 4 december 1979, NJ 1980, 356. 18 november 1980, NJ 1981, 125. 2 maart 1982, NJ 1982, 460. 5 oktober 1982, NJ 1983, 297. 20 maart 1984, NJ 1984, 549. 30 oktober 1984, NJ 1985, 275. 11 oktober 1986, NJ 1988. 14 oktober 1986, NJ 1987, 564. 14 oktober 1986, NJ 1988, 511, ann. ThWvV. 26 april 1988, NJ 1989, 390, ann. ThWvV. 14 september 1992, NJ 1993, 83. 9 maart 1993, NJ 1993, 633. 11 november 1994, NJ 1995, 400, ann. EAA/HJS. 13 June 1995, NJ 1995, 684. 19 december 1995, NJ 1996, 249, ann. Sch. (Zwolsman). 19 maart 1996, NJ 1997, 85, ann. Knigge. 7 mei 1996, NJ 1996, 687, ann. Sch. 27 mei 1997, NJ 1997, 550. 2 juni 1998, NJ 1998, 783. 30 juni 1998 NJ 1998, 799, ann. Sch. 18 mei 1999, NJ 2000, 104, ann. Sch. 2 november 1999, NJ 2000, 162. 30 november 1999 NJ 2000, 344 en 345 ann. Mevis. 25 januari 2000, NJ 2000, 279. 8 februari 2000, NJ 2000, 316. 4 april 2000, NJ 2000, 735. 20 juni 2000, NJ 2000, 502. 7 november 2000, LJN AA8207. 5 juni 2001, NJ 2001, 518. 25 september 2001, NJ 2002, 97. 12 februari 2002, NJ 2002, 301. 14 januari 2003, NJ 2003, 288. 18 maart 2003, NJ 2003, 527. 8 april 2003, NJ 2003, 420. 7 oktober 2003, NJ 2004, 118. 24 februari 2004, NJ 2004, 226. 30 maart 2004, NJ 2004, 376, ann. Y.B.

671

672

HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR

List of Cases

20 april 2004, NJ 2004, 525. 16 november 2004, NJ 2005, 171. 29 maart 2005, LJN AS27527. 6 september 2005, NJ 2006, 447. 11 oktober 2005, NJ 2006, 625. 7 februari 2006, NJ 2007, 396. 13 juni 2006, NJ 2006, 346. 5 september 2006, NJ 2007, 336, ann. Sch (Eik). 17 oktober 2006, NJ 2007, 80, ann. Alkema. 7 november 2006, NJ 2007, 108. 21 november 2006, NJ 2006, 653. 21 november 2006, NJ 2007, 233, ann. Mevis. 23 oktober 2007, LJN BB3067. 13 november 2007, NJ 2007, 614. 22 januari 2008, LJN BC1375. 12 februari 2008, NJ 2008, 248. 11 maart 2008, NJ 2008, 328. 11 maart 2008, NJ 2008, 329, ann. Borgers. 10 juni 2008, NJ 2008, 348. 20 januari 2009, NJ 2009, 225. 12 mei 2009, LJN BH5249. 7 juli 2009, NJ 2009, 528, ann. Buruma. 8 september 2009, NJ 2009, 427. 22 december 2009, LJN BJ8622. 26 januari 2010, NJ 2010, 77. 23 maart 2010, NJ 2010, 197. 30 maart 2010, NJ 2010, 201. 5 oktober 2010, LJN BL5629. 15 maart 2011, LJN BP7544 (CPG 08/04418). 22 maart 2011, NJ 2011, 144.

Courts of Appeal the Netherlands Hof Hof Hof Hof Hof Hof Hof Hof Hof Hof

Amsterdam 3 juni 1977, NJ 1978, 601. Amsterdam 9 juni 1994, NJ 1994, 709. Amsterdam 24 juni 2004, NJ 2004, 531. Arnhem 23 december 2002, NJ 2003, 134. ’s-Gravenhage 31 mei 2002, LJN AE3708. ’s-Gravenhage 15 november 2002, NJ 2003, 23. ’s-Gravenhage 21 juni 2004, NJ 2004, 432 (Eik). ’s-Gravenhage 22 februari 2005, LJN AU0235. ’s-Gravenhage 1 maart 2007, LJN AZ9644. ’s-Gravenhage 2 oktober 2008, LJN BF3987 (Piranha).

List of Cases

673

District Courts the Netherlands Rechtbank Rechtbank Rechtbank Rechtbank Rechtbank Rechtbank Rechtbank Rechtbank

Amsterdam 1 december 2005, LJN AU7314. Amsterdam 9 maart 2006, LJN AV4173. Amsterdam 29 juni 2007, LJN BA9602 en LJN BA9586. ‘s-Gravenhage 21 november 2000, LJN AA8414. ‘s-Gravenhage 15 januari 2004, NJ 2004, 276. Rotterdam 18 december 2002, LJN AF2141. Rotterdam 5 juni 2003, LJN AF9546. Rotterdam 1 december 2006, LJN AZ3589 (Piranha).

Supreme Court United States Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 114 S.Ct. 807 (1994). Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41, 87 S.Ct. 1873 (1967). Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 55 S.Ct. 629 (1935). Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999 (1971). Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194 (1963). Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398, 126 S.Ct. 1943 (2006). Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 69 S.Ct. 1302 (1949). Byod. v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 6 S.Ct. 524. California v. Ciraolo, 467 U.S. 207, 106 S.Ct. 1809 (1968). California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35, 108 S.Ct. 1625 (1988). Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523, 87 S.Ct. 1727 (1967). CIA v. Sims, 471 U.S. 159, 105 S.Ct. 1881 (1985). City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 121 S.Ct. 447 (2000). Clinton v. Virginia, 377 U.S. 158, 84 S.Ct. 1186 (1964). Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432, 15 S.Ct. 394 (1895). Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S.Ct. 2022 (1971). Dalia v. United States, 441 U.S. 238, 247, 99 S.Ct. 1682, 1688 (1979). Delaware v. Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 106 S.Ct. 1431 (1986). Dowling v. United States, 493 U.S. 343, 110 S.Ct. 668 (1990). Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, 88 S.Ct. 1444 (1968). Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 109S.Ct. 693 (1989). Frank v. Mangum, 237 U.S. 309, 35 S.Ct. 582 (1915). Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103, 126 S.Ct. 1515 (2006). Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United States, 282 U.S. 344, 51 S.Ct. 153 (1931). Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 90 S.Ct. 1011 (1970). Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868, 107 S.Ct. 3164 (1987). Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1678 (1965). Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 124 S.Ct. 2633, 2648 (2004). Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135,129 S.Ct. 695 (2009).

674

List of Cases

Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 408 (1966). Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586, 126 S.Ct. 2159 (2006). Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 104 S.Ct. 3194 (1984). Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 103 S.Ct. 2317 (1983). Illinois v. Krull, 480 U.S. 340, 107 S.Ct. 1160 (1987). Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419, 124 S.Ct. 885 (2004). Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath, 341 U.S. 123, 71 S.Ct. 624 (1951). Katz v. Unites States, 389 U.S. 347, 88 S.Ct. 507 (1967). Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 121 S.Ct. 2038 (2001). Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1, 84 S.Ct. 1489 (1964). Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684 (1961). Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137, 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803). Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. 79, 107 S.Ct. 1013 (1987). Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 96 S.Ct. 893 (1976). McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819). Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491, 128 S.Ct. 1346 (2008). Medina v. California, 505 U.S. 437, 112 S.Ct. 2572 (1992). Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444, 110 S.Ct. 2481 (1990). Mugler v. State of Kansas, 123 U.S. 623, 8 S.Ct. 273 (1887). Murray v. United States, 487 U.S. 533, 108 S.Ct. 2529 (1988). Nardone v. United States, 308 U.S. 338, 60 S.Ct. 266 (1939). National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656, 109 S.Ct. 1348 (1989). New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 105 S.Ct. 733 (1985). Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 104 S.Ct. 2501 (1984). Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 48 S.Ct. 564 (1928). Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460, 129 S.Ct. 1125 (2009). Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 385, 117 S. Ct. 1416 (1997). Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165, 72 S.Ct. 205 (1954) Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 118 S.Ct. 1708 (1998). Safford Unified School District No. 1 v. Reddings, 129 S.Ct. 2633 (2009). Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843, 126 S.Ct. 2193 (2006). Scott v. United States, 436 U.S. 128, 98 S.Ct. 1717 (1978). Shadwick v. City of Tampa, 407 U.S. 345, 92 S.Ct. 2119 (1972). Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505, 81 S.Ct. 679 (1961). Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 99 S.Ct. 2577 (1979). Steele v. United States, 267 U.S. 498, 45 S.Ct. 414 (1925). Tenet et al. v. Doe et Ux, 544 U.S. 1, 125 S.Ct. 1230 (2005). Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 69 S.Ct. 894 (1949). Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868 (1968). Totten, Administrator v. United States, 92 U.S. 105, 1875 WL17758 (1876). United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 94 S.Ct. 613 (1974). United States v. Chavez, 416 U.S. 562, 94 S.Ct. 1849 (1974). United States v. Giordano, 416 U.S. 505, 94 S.Ct. 1820 (1974).

List of Cases

675

United States v. Havens, 466 U.S. 620, 100 S.Ct. 1912 (1980). United States v. Kahn, 415 U.S. 143, 94 S.Ct. 997 (1974). United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705, 104 S.Ct. 3296 (1984). United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112, 122 S.Ct. 587 (2001). United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276, 103 S.Ct. 1081 (1983). United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405 (1984). United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 115 S.Ct.1624 (1995). United States v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435, 96 S.Ct. 1619 (1976). United States v. Noble, 422 U.S. 225, 95 S.Ct. 2160 (1975). United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 103 S.Ct. 2637 (1983). United States v. Ramirez, 523 U.S. 65, 118 S.Ct. 992 (1998). United States v. R. Enterprises Inc., 498 U.S. 292, 111 S.Ct. 722 (1991). United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 109 S.Ct. 1581 (1989). United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 110 S.Ct. 1056 (1990). United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Keith), 407 U.S. 297, 92 S.Ct. 2125 (1972). United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745, 91 S.Ct. 1122 (1971). Vernonia School District v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646, 115 S.Ct. 2386 (1995). Virginia v. Moore, 553 U.S. 164, 128 S.Ct. 1598 (2008). Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S.Ct. 1769 (1996). Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927, 115 S.Ct. 1914 (1995). Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407 (1963).

Courts of Appeals United States Bassiouni v. CIA, 392 F.3d 244, (7th Cir. 2004). Bassiouni v. FBI, 436 F.3d 712 (7th Cir. 2006). Catledge v. Mueller, 323 Fed. Appx 464, 2009 WL 1025980 (7th Cir. 2009). Doe v. Gonzales, 449 F.3d 415 (2nd Cir. 2006). Doe v. Mukasey, 549 F.3d 861 (2nd Cir. 2008). In re Kevork, 788 F2d 566 (9th Cir. 1986). In re Terrorist Bombings of U.S. Embassies in East Africa, 552 F.3d 157 (2nd Cir. 2008). Macwade v. Kelly, 460 F.3d 260 (2nd Cir. 2006). Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964 (9th Cir. 2010). United States v. Abu Ali, 528 F.3d 210 (4th Cir. 2008). United States v. Abu-Jihaad, 630 F.3d 102 (2nd Cir. 2010). United States v. Biasucci, 786 F.2d2d 504 (2nd Cir. 1986). United States v. Cox, 342 F.2d 167 (5th Cir. 1965). United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59 (2nd Cir. 1984). United States v. Edwards, 498 F.2d 496 (2nd Cir. 1974). United States v. Freitas, 800 F.2d 1451 (9th Cir.1968). United States v. Johnson, 952 F.2d 565 (1st Cir. 1991).

676

List of Cases

United States v. Ning Wen, 477 F.3d 896 (7th Cir. 2007). United States v. Pangburn, 983 F.2d 449 (2nd Cir. 1993). United States v. Pelton, 835 F.2d 1067 (4th Cir. 1987). United States v. Petti, 973 F.2d 1441 (9th Cir. 1992). United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88 (2nd Cir. 1999). United States v. Ramos, 629 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2010). United States v. Sarkissian, 841 F.2d 959 (9th Cir. 1988). United States v. Simons, 206 F.3d 392 (4th Cir. 2000). United States v. Skipwith, 482 F.2d 1272 (5th Cir. 1973). United States v. Smith, 780 F.2d 1102 (4th Cir. 1985). United States v. Stewart, 590 F.3d 93 (2nd Cir. 2009). United States v. Truong Ding Hung, 629 F.2d 908 (4th Cir. 1980). United States v. Villegas, 899 F.2d 1324 (2nd Cir. 1990). United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui, 382 F.3d 453 (4th Cir. 2004). Warshak v. United States, 490 F.3d 455 (6th Cir. 2007). Warshak v. United States, 631 F.3d 266 (6th Cir. 2010).

District Courts United States ACLU v. United States Department of Justice (ACLU I), 265 F.Supp.2d 20 (D.D.C. 2003) ACLU v. United States Department of Justice (ACLU II), 321 F.Supp.2d 24 (D.D.C. 2004). Doe v. Ashcroft (Doe I), 334 F.Supp.2d 471 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). Doe v. Gonzales (Doe II), 386 F.Supp.2d 66 (D.Conn. 2005). Doe v. Gonzales (Doe III), 500 F.Supp.2d 379 (S.D.N.Y. 2007). Doe v. Holder, 665 F.Supp.2d 426 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). Doe v. Holder, 703 F.Supp.2d 313 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). Doe v. Holder, 04 Civ. 2614, 30 July 2010, p. 2 (Available at: http://www. wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/08/Doe-vs-Holder_NSL.pdf, last visited at November 23, 2010). In re Application of the United States for an Order for Prospective Cell Site Information on a Certain Cellular Telephone, 460 F.Supp.2d 448 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). In re Application of the United States of America for an Order Authorizing the Use of a Pen Register with Caller Identification Device Cell Site Location Authority on a Cellular Telephone, 2009 WL 159187 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). In re Applications of the United States of America for Orders Pursuant to Title I8, United States Code, Section 2703(d), 509 F.Supp.2d 76 (D.Mass. 2007). In re Kevork, 634 F.Supp. 1002 (C.D.Cal. 1985). Martinez v. Ensor, 958 F.Supp. 515 (D.Colo. 1997). Mayfield v. United States, 504 F.Supp.2d 1023 (D.Or. 2007). People of State of New York v. Muka, 440 F.Supp. 33 (N.D.N.Y. 1977). United States v. Abu-Jihaad, 531 F.Supp.2d 299 (D.Conn. 2008).

List of Cases

United United United United United United United United

States States States States States States States States

677

v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.

Bin Laden, 126 F.Supp.2d 264 (S.D.N.Y. 2000). Duffey, 2009 WL 2356156 (N.D.Tex. 2009). Falvey, 540 F.Supp. 1306 (E.D.N.Y. 1982). Mubayyid, 521 F.Supp.2d 125 (D.Mass. 2007). Rahman, 861 F.Supp. 247 (S.D.N.Y. 1994). Ramos, 591 F.Supp.2d 93 (D. Mass. 2008). Tomero, 462 F.Supp.2d 565 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). Warsame, 547 F.Supp.2d 982 (D. Minn. 2008).

FISA Court and FISA Court of Review United States In re All Matters Submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, 218 F.Supp.2d 611 (Foreign Int. Surv. Ct. 2002). In re Directives Pursuant to Section 105B of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, 551 F.3d 1004 (FISA Ct. Rev. 2008). In re Sealed Case, 310 F.3d 717 (FISA Ct. Rev. 2002).

Index

A actionable intelligence, 571 administrative disturbance, 166, 169, 201–205, 209, 254–255 administrative supervision, 74, 76, 85, 93, 121–122, 125–127, 147, 158, 254, 267 administrative supervisory powers, 84–86, 93, 126–127, 158, 257 adversarial, 7, 41, 55–58, 192, 259, 283–284, 506, 553, 599–600 agent of a foreign power, 318–323, 375–376, 405, 407–408, 417, 442, 478, 484, 493, 495, 500, 506–507, 517, 519, 543, 631 air security, 161, 462 AIVD intelligence oversight committee, 88–89, 188, 196–197, 265, 638–639 investigation, 186–187, 249–250, 252, 263, 268–269, 639–641 special powers, 121 AIVD-report/AIVD-information, 89–92, 99, 136–138, 157–158, 169, 186–193, 194–196, 207, 216–217, 235, 244–245, 247, 249–250, 258, 260–263, 265, 268, 273, 638–640, 642–643 Al Qaeda, 334, 401, 567, 570 anonymous information, 135–136, 217 anticipative criminal investigation definition, 2, 3–6, 17, 541–544 the Netherlands, 167–170, 205–207, 256–259, 269–270

the United States, 387–391, 445–448, 492–498, 517–518 Article 8 ECHR accessibility, 50, 114 foreseeability, 50, 112–116, 221–231, 583 legitimate aim, 50, 117, 119, 221, 226, 228, 231–232, 558, 560, 619 margin of appreciation, 47, 117, 134, 226, 232, 538, 623 necessary in a democratic society, 49–50, 60, 113–114, 117, 121, 204, 214–215, 221, 231–232, 558, 619 reasonable expectation, 48, 51, 78

B balancing approach, 30, 536–538, 560, 605–606 Beccaria, 13, 548 Berger, 310, 328, 336, 341, 351, 355, 452, 498–499 Bill of Rights, 280–281, 285, 290, 294, 381 Bivens claim, 334–335, 505, 629 Board of Procurators-General, 62, 625 burden of proof, 53–54, 283, 354, 361, 412, 547

C Carnivore system filter, 460 categorical exceptions, 564–565, 578, 628, 633 cell site information, 457–458 Central Assessment Committee, 99

M.F.H. Hirsch Ballin, Anticipative Criminal Investigation, DOI: 10.1007/978-90-6704-843-9, Ó T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author 2012

679

680 Church Committee, 316–317, 363 CIA, 304–305, 317 CIE, 63–64, 136, 216, 543 CIE-report/CIE information, 136–138, 189, 217, 260–263, 266, 273, 639 CIPA, 329, 331–334, 378, 476, 507–509, 511, 523, 600, 611–612, 643–646, 649 civil litigation, 329, 336, 504, 636 classified information, 329, 331–334, 476, 507–508, 510, 564, 600, 642, 644–645 Commander-in-Chief, 303, 439 Commerce Clause, 280 Congressional oversight, 316, 376, 393, 395, 404, 414, 441, 445, 476, 479, 481, 485, 490, 505, 514, 520, 635 consensual monitoring, 309, 364, 396–397 conspiracy, 2, 5, 81, 141, 313–314, 323, 325, 361, 368, 371, 380 Constitution the Netherlands, 15, 42–46, 51–52, 97, 103, 112–113 the United States, 15, 279–281, 285–286, 288, 296, 550 Constitutionalization, 14, 285 constitutive principles, 533–534, 540–541, 544–547, 559–561, 578, 585, 600, 603, 607, 609, 646, 652 Container Inspection Program, 461, 463 control controlling mechanisms, 196–197, 262, 265–266, 505, 520, 590, 594, 597, 602, 608, 634–636, 638–639, 641, 645 ex ante/prior judicial control, 68, 101, 242, 245–246, 267, 345, 483, 485, 488, 523, 622, 630, 635 ex post/a posteriori judicial control, 105–106, 134, 153, 194, 225, 240–241, 244–245, 268, 471, 475, 514, 596, 622, 625, 635–636, 643 judicial control/review, 242, 245, 263–266, 272–273, 375, 380, 456, 470, 472, 479, 520–521, 576, 594, 596, 630, 634–635, 638–639, 645 oversight, 240, 397, 447, 474–475, 520 Council of Europe, 18, 21–22, 24, 222–223, 267, 535 counterbalancing procedures, 602, 640, 642, 644, 649 crime control, 12, 28, 40, 282–283, 285, 297, 330, 382, 399 criminal behavior, 1, 2, 42, 134, 168, 234, 278, 281, 283, 303, 315, 325, 380, 565, 568–569, 578, 580, 605, 609, 652

Index criminal intelligence, 21, 63, 169, 207, 335, 369–370, 402–403, 476 criminal investigation classical investigation, 79–82, 92, 132, 138, 142–143, 215, 217–218, 613 covert, 106–107, 115, 151, 221, 223, 251, 277, 311, 351, 386–387, 422, 447–448, 451, 453, 456, 542, 554 criminal investigative domains, 214, 235–239, 247, 250, 252, 254, 258 full investigation, 364–368, 371, 426–419, 432, 435–436 organized crime investigation, 79, 81–82, 92, 132, 139–140, 144, 176, 215, 217–218, 252, 310, 393, 568 preliminary investigation (NL), 67, 72–73, 86–87, 120–122, 129–132, 138, 143–144, 152, 172, 175, 177–180, 206, 210, 212–214, 221, 227–228, 238–239, 252, 272, 610, 613, 620–621 preliminary investigation (US), 364–365, 367–368, 427–428, 432, 435, 443 terrorist crime investigation, 206, 213, 226, 271, 613, 617, 619 criminal procedural law classical approach, 13 objectives, 11–16, 32, 38–39, 207, 209, 282, 381, 536, 537, 541, 544, 559, 606 CT Infobox, 169, 185, 187, 197–200, 203, 206, 249–251, 253, 256, 258, 260, 573 culture of control, 19, 25, 535, 559, 564 cumulation of spheres, 127

D data aggregation, 476 data mining, 227, 476 delayed notice, 336, 350–352, 361, 393-395, 447, 451, 452-456, 521, 630 deradicalization, 167, 205, 254 diffuse nature/threat, 543, 567, 569, 580, 586, 647 Director of Central Intelligence, 305 Director of National Intelligence, 305, 437, 440, 491, 506, 514, 576 Directorate of Intelligence, 304 disclosure, 90, 106, 108–109, 133, 192, 260, 283, 293, 301, 328–329, 332–334, 407, 448, 476, 506–511 domestic security investigation, 364, 367

Index due process due process clause, 278, 286, 291–293, 295, 326, 328–329, 351, 381 independent due process, 295 procedural due process, 278, 292–295, 326–327, 329, 377, 383, 448, 492, 504, 511, 516, 523, 544, 552 substantive due process, 292, 326 duty to compile records, 108, 111, 124, 131, 151–153, 155, 179, 225, 228, 230, 256–257 Dworkin, 10, 12, 539

E effective remedy, 109–110, 246, 623–625, 630, 636 Eik, 188–189, 194, 262 emergency interception, 348, 472 emergency measures, 561–563 emergency powers, 562, 578 enterprise investigation, 436, 496–497, 631, 634 racketeering enterprise investigation, 367, 369–370, 425 terrorism enterprise investigation, 425, 427 entrapment, 196, 312–313 espionage, 280, 304, 318, 417, 429, 465, 496 European Union, 6, 18, 20–22, 47, 161, 164–165, 535 ex ante review/authorization, 62, 469, 472, 475, 478–479, 511, 520, 523 ex post review, 116, 441, 472 exclusionary rule, 287, 326–327, 330, 335, 353–355, 362–363, 377–380, 447, 475, 510, 520 exculpatory evidence/circumstances, 42, 100, 327–328, 330–331 Executive Order 12333, 302, 315, 317, 319, 321, 428 executive power, 322, 488, 514 exigent circumstances, 347, 368, 468–469, 471–472, 520, 564

F fair trial (Article 6 ECHR) equality of arms, 55–58, 192, 259, 261, 267, 552–553, 599–600 fishing expeditions, 95, 122, 213, 350 focused investigation, 572, 574 foreign intelligence information, 372–374, 378, 405–406, 408, 415–416, 418–419, 421–422, 424, 430, 432,

681 440–441, 446, 465, 479, 484, 486, 493, 503, 517, 631–632, 643 foreign intelligence surveillance, 318, 323, 374, 441 foreign power, 316, 318–323, 373, 375–376, 405, 407–408, 417, 442, 477–478, 493, 495, 499, 506, 514, 517, 519, 631 formal legality, 9, 12, 539, 546 Fourth Amendment particularity, 341, 346, 347, 349, 357–358, 378–379, 382, 479–480, 589 reasonable expectation of privacy, 288–290, 306–308, 311, 324–325, 380, 382, 396, 457–459, 468, 473, 628–629 Reasonableness Fourth Amendment approach, 286 totality-of-circumstances test, 293, 339–341, 348, 378, 400, 460, 467, 475, 512, 522, 625–626 fruit of the poisonous tree, 355 fundamental fairness, 291, 293, 295, 329, 510–511 fusion center, 403, 476, 494

G government-citizen relationship, 579 grand jury secrecy, 301, 418, 493 grand jury subpoena, 300, 431, 485

H habeas data, 551, 596 hearsay testimony (de auditu), 40–41, 55, 151 human dignity, 8–11, 12–14, 21, 28–31, 54, 533, 536–537, 539, 540, 544–545, 547, 554–556, 600, 603 hybrid framework, 566, 569, 578, 580, 602

I In re Sealed, 376, 420, 465, 496, 501, 503, 509, 522, 632 indictment, 295, 300, 333 inquisitorial, 7, 40–41, 106 Inspector General, 376, 445, 476, 635–636 institutional separation, 197, 206, 251, 382, 492, 511, 561, 576, 579 integrity, 298, 353, 355, 360–366, 545, 551, 554, 556–557, 576–577, 579–581, 587–590, 593–599, 601–602

682 intelligence-led, 3–5, 164, 169, 184–185, 207, 209, 245, 247, 252, 258–260, 646

J Joint Terrorism Task Force, 437, 476, 573, 633 judicial scrutiny, 594, 630, 636

K Kant, 9–10 Katz, 288, 307–309, 349, 355, 458, 469, 473, 498–499 Keith, 315–318, 322, 325, 369, 372, 376, 464–465, 473, 478–479, 498–499, 501–502, 504, 514, 522, 538, 632, 649 knock and announce rule, 350–352, 354

L legal tradition, 7, 39–40, 546, 606 library provision, 407, 485 Locke, 9–10, 562 lone wolf, 405, 478, 446, 477, 507, 566, 631, 652

M material witness statute, 386 minimization procedures, 228, 347, 361, 374, 415, 420–421, 441–442, 481, 483, 486, 506, 513–514, 517, 520, 589, 597, 621, 635–636

N National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, 387–388 National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, 166, 168–169, 199–200, 206, 251, 255 National Ombudsman, 183, 246, 624 national public prosecutor for counterterrorism, 90, 99, 187, 196–198, 249, 262, 265, 641–642, 648 National Security Agency, 304, 440 National Security Council, 304 national security power, 295, 303, 320, 512 Necessary and proper clause, 280, 303 negative duty, 10, 12, 29 non-content information, 460

Index non-disclosure requirement (gag order), 407, 409–414, 442, 444, 482, 487–490, 515–516, 521 notice requirement, 350–351, 453 notification, 89, 99, 106, 109–111, 153, 199, 222, 249, 294, 333, 336, 350, 356, 361, 378–379, 393–394, 404, 427, 453–456, 480, 488, 490, 596–598, 623–625, 629–630, 636

O officer of the court, 298, 327 organized context, 140, 142 overlapping purposes, 86, 252–253

P parallel investigation, 91, 186, 193–197, 206, 248, 252 , 263, 265, 269, 273, 611, 638–640 parameters, 472, 475 , 533–534, 540–541, 544–545, 554–555, 559–560, 577, 580–581, 603, 607, 627, 647, 652 Piranha, 143, 189, 194–196, 236, 262 police police decentralization, 296 police (investigative) discretion, 58, 66, 71, 92, 96, 120, 158, 183, 213, 218, 229–231, 234, 239, 240, 243–244, 247, 296–297, 358, 390, 394, 423, 444, 474–477, 495, 497, 517, 618, 620, 622 police power, 185, 296 police task law enforcement task, 63–64, 66, 73–74, 76, 94, 120, 125, 255, 297, 497 police task general, 64, 73, 120 task of administrative enforcement, 61, 73, 203, 210, 233, 254–255 positive duty, 10, 12, 23, 29, 117, 535 precautionary principle, 25, 535, 559, 564 predicated investigation, 431–432, 435 preliminary inquiry, 367–369, 426 preliminary judicial investigation, 67, 102–104 preparatory information-gathering activities, 258, 270, 610, 637–638, 640–641, 648 pre-trial disclosure, 328–329 preventive paradigm, 3, 5–6, 29, 163, 165, 168, 233, 385–387, 450, 517, 646

Index principle of immediacy, 40–41, 55, 259 principle of opportunity, 42 principles of the due administration of justice definition, 58 détournement de pouvoir, 54, 59, 61, 74, 91, 95, 122, 125, 127, 195, 196, 258, 260, 273 principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, 59–60, 89, 95, 98, 100, 102, 148, 157–158, 219, 225, 234, 240, 245, 248, 614, 618 privilege of confidentiality, 246 privileges and immunities clause, 290 proactive investigation, 4, 28, 81, 83, 109, 125, 218, 285, 380, 391 procedural sanctions, 58, 94, 106, 155, 624, 641 programmatic purpose, 465, 502–504, 522, 633 prosecutorial discretion, 42, 66, 71, 92, 158, 244, 284, 298, 618 prosecutorial duty to disclose, 328 public prosecutor for the CIE, 262, 639 purpose language, 321–322, 325, 415, 419–422, 491 , 493, 498, 500–501, 503, 517, 633–634 purpose limitation, 61, 92, 121, 158, 258, 267, 522, 546, 551, 558

Q quasi-law enforcement framework, 480, 495–496, 512, 519, 609, 630, 643

R radicalization (radicalized people), 19, 162–163, 166, 198, 567, 570, 582, 585, 621 rechtsstaat, 7–10, 113 regulatory rules, 31, 541, 557, 560, 581, 588 risk society, 19, 25, 559, 564 risk-free society, 574 risk-policing, 466 routing information, 396, 458–459 roving bug, 311, 347, 451 roving taps, 311

S security zones, 182–184, 206, 213, 230–232, 240, 243, 255, 619–620, 622 selective incorporation, 291

683 separation of powers doctrine, 298 Shadow judgments, 74 shielded witnesses, 68, 149, 168, 173, 191–193, 641–642 sleeping cell, 174, 371 sneak-and-peak searches, 308, 393–394, 454 social solidarity, 575 special needs doctrine, 343, 400, 461–465, 501–502, 512, 522, 564, 628 special procedure, 68, 600–601 state of emergency, 562–563 substantive norms, 29, 547 sunset provision, 404, 415, 453, 563 Supremacy Clause, 279

T terrorism (definition), 566 Terrorist Surveillance Program, 390, 438–440, 450 terrorist suspects, 2, 188–189, 206, 258, 269, 273, 450, 461, 504, 638 Terry stop and frisk, 341–342, 398, 400, 447, 466–468, 626 threat assessment/analyses, 253, 408, 418, 431, 576, 592 training for terrorism, 5, 165, 210 transaction (settlement), 41, 64, 100, 284 Truong, 322, 374, 495, 498, 500, 504

U ultimum remedium, 15, 17, 31, 54, 64, 542, 558, 584–585, 614, 647 United Nations, 18–20, 22, 164–165, 535

V Van Traa Parliamentary Inquiry Commission, 75, 82, 96

W warrant judge, 62, 68–69, 92, 101–104, 157, 241–243, 272 warrantless search, 338, 347, 398, 402, 469–471

Z Zwolsman, 74-77, 82, 118, 152