Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Rule-making, rule-breaking? Law breaking by government in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article concerns a relatively novel issue: rule breaking and unlawful conduct by government bodies; to which degree does it occur, what is the nature of this misconduct, what are the underlying motives, and what are the consequences and possible solutions? Rule and law breaking is harmful for the credibility and integrity of a state and its law enforcement system. However, very little empirical research has been carried out into this issue, in comparison to research into state crime. There is little clarity about how public actors deal with criminal and administrative laws and rules in areas like environmental protection, safety regulations and working conditions. Do government bodies set a good example? Is their behaviour better or worse than the public and businesses? An analytical framework for research will be presented and also the results of an extensive research project in the Netherlands; the main themes of which have been benchmarked against data from the United Kingdom. The article will conclude with a summary of the main findings and a number of suggestions for further research and policy development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adams, G. B., & Balfour, D. L. (2004). Unmasking administrative evil. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe (revised edition).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Audit Commission (1994). Protecting the public purse 2: Ensuring probity in the NHS. Audit Commission.

  3. Audit Commission (2005). Public interest report: Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council. Audit Commission.

  4. Audit Commission (2005). Ethical governance in local government in England. London: Audit Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baer, J., & Chambliss, W. J. (1997). Generating fear: The politics of crime reporting. Crime, Law and Social Change, 27(2), 87–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bull, M. J., & Newell, J. L. (Eds.) (2003). Corruption in contemporary politics. Houndsmill, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

  7. Cirell, J., & Bennett, S. Point of law – Back in the line of fire (available at http://www.cipfa.org.uk/publicfinance).

  8. Commissie Bestuursrechtelijke en Privaatrechtelijke handhaving (1998). Handhaven op niveau. Deventer, The Netherlands: W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Committee of Public Accounts (2002). The operation and wind-up of Teesside Development Corporation. (HC57, 2002).

  10. Committee on Standards in Public Life (2005). Getting the balance right. implementing standards of conduct in public life. London, Tenth Report 6407.

  11. Cooke, S. (2001). Corruption resistance strategies: Researching risks in local government. Research findings. Sydney, Australia: ICAC.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Coolsma, J. C. (2003). De uitvoering van beleid. In A. Hoogerwerf & M. Herweijer (Eds.), Overheidsbeleid. Een inleiding in de beleidswetenschap. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.

  13. Cunningham, N., Grabosky, P., & Sinclair, D. (1999). Smart regulation: designing environmental policy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. De Ridder, J. (2005). Een goede raad voor toezicht. The Hague, The Netherlands: Boom Juridische uitgevers.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Doig, A. (1995). Mixed signals? Public sector change and the proper conduct of public business. Public Administration, 73(2), 191–212.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Doig, A. (1995). No reason for complacency? Organisational change and probity in local government. Local Government Studies, 21(1), 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Doig, A., & Clark, D. (2003). Governmental law and law-breaking: United Kingdom. Report for the research project ‘Overtredende Overheden’. Middlesbrough: University of Teesside.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Doig, A., & Wilson, J. (1998). What price new public management? Political Quarterly, 69(3), 267–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Drupsteen, Th. G., de Leeuw, S. D. M., Snijhorst, R., & van der Tang-van Loenen, P. H. (1997). Handhaving jegens overheden. Rapport voor de commissie Bestuursrechtelijke en Privaatrechtelijke handhaving. Leiden: Department of Constitutional and Administrative Law, Leiden University.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., Fitzgerald, L., & Pettigrew, A. (1996). The new public management in action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fijnaut, C., & Huberts, L. (Eds.) (2002). Corruption, integrity and law enforcement. Dordrecht: Kluwer Law International.

  22. Finney, H. C., & Lesieur, H. R. (1982). A contingency theory of organizational crime. In Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1, 255–299.

  23. Flynn, N. (1997). Public sector management (3rd ed., p. 107). Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall/Harvester Wheatsheaf.

  24. Frederickson, H. G.(1999). Ethics and the new managerialism. Public Administration & Management, 4(2), 299–324.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Friedrichs, D. O. (1996). Trusted criminals. White collar crime in contemporary society. Belmont (etc.): Wadsworth.

  26. Grabosky, P. N., & Braithwaite, J. (1986). Of manners gentle: Enforcement strategies of Australian business regulatory agencies. Melbourne and New York: Oxford University Press (in association with Australian Institute of Criminology).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Green, P. (2005). Disaster by design, corruption, construction and catastrophe. The British Journal of Criminology, 44(4), 528–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Green, P., & Ward T. (2004). State crime. London, UK: Pluto.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ghere, R. (1996). Aligning the ethics of public–private partnership: The issue of local economic development. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 6(4), 599–621.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hampshire, S., Scanlon, T. M., Williams, B., Nagel, T., & Dworkin, R. (1978). Public and private morality. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Harrow, J., & Gillett, R. (1994). The proper conduct of public business. Public Money and Management, 14(2), 4–5.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Heywood, P. (Ed.) (1997). Political corruption. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

  33. Hood, C., James, O., Jones, G., & Travers, T. (1998). Regulations inside government: Where new public management meets the audit explosion. Public Money and Management, 18(2), 61–89 (April–June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Huberts, L., Van Montfort, A., & Doig, A. (2006). Is government setting a good example? Rule breaking by government in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The Hague, The Netherlands: BJu Legal.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Huberts, L., Verberk, S., Berndsen, S., van den Heuvel, H., van Montfort, A., Huisman, W., et al. (2005). Overtredende overheden, Op zoek naar de omvang en oorzaken van regelovertreding door overheden. The Hague, The Netherlands: Boom Juridische uitgevers.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Huisman, W. (2001). Tussen winst en moraal. Achtergronden van regelnaleving en regelovertreding door ondernemingen. Den Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jones, P. (2004). Fraud and corruption in public services. A guide to risk and prevention. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kagan, R.A. Regulatory enforcement. In D. H. Rosenbloom & R. D., Schwartz (Eds.), Handbook of regulation and administrative law. New York: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kagan, R. A. (1978). Regulatory justice. Implementing a wage–price freeze. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kaptein, M., & Wempe J. (2002). The balanced company: A theory of corporate integrity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kauzlarich, D., Matthews, R. A., & Miller, W. J. (2001). Toward a victimology of state crime. Critical Criminology, 10, 173–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Kauzlarich, D., Mullins, C. W., & Matthews, R. A. (2003). A complicity continuum of state crime. Contemporary Justice Review, 6(3), 241–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kleiman, W. M., & van den Berg, E. A. I. M. (1995). Overtredende overheden. Vervolgingsbeleid inzake milieudelicten. The Hague, The Netherlands: WODC.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kramer, R. C., & Michalowski, R. J. (2005). War, aggression and state crime, a criminological analysis of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The British Journal of Criminology, 45(4), 446–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Lane, J., & Petersilia, J. (Eds.) (1998). Criminal justice policy. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar.

  46. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Maguire M., Morgan, R., & Reiner, R. (1997). The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Montefiori, A. (1999). Integrity: A philosopher’s introduction. In A. Montefiori & D. Vines (Eds.), Integrity in the public and private domains. London: Routledge, 3–18.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Muncie, J., McLaughlin E., & Langan, M. (1996). Criminological perspectives. A reader. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  50. National Audit Office (1994). The sports council. HC131. London, UK: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  51. National Audit Office (1998). Special Compliance Office: Prevention of Corruption. HC 1058. TSO.

  52. National Audit Office (2001). Inappropriate adjustments to NHS waiting lists. HC 452. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Nelen, H. (2003). Integriteit in publieke functies. Het centrale registratiepunt integriteitsschendingen van de gemeente Amsterdam doorgelicht. Den Haag: Boom juridische uitgevers.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Nelen, J. M., & Niewendijk, A. (2003). Geen ABC. Analyse van rijksrechercheonzoeken naar ambtelijke en bestuurlijke corruptie. The Hague, The Netherlands: Boom Juridische uitgevers.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Peij, S. C., & Westerink, B. G. (with the cooperation of Schuiling, K. F., & Winter, H. B.) (1997). Juridische controlling: een organisatiekundige handleiding. Deventer: W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink.

  56. Punch, M. Conduct unbecoming (1985). The social construction of police deviance and control. London/New York: Tavistock.

  57. Punch, M. (1996). Dirty business: Exploring corporate misconduct. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Reijneveld, S. A., Crone, M. R., Verhulst, F. C., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. (2003). The effect of a severe disaster on the mental health of adolescents: A controlled study. The Lancet, 362, 691–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Roef, D. (2001). Strafbare overheden. Een rechtsvergelijkende studie naar de strafrechtelijke aansprakelijkheid van overheden voor milieuverstoring. Antwerpen: Intersentia.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Rohr, J. A. (1989). Ethics for bureaucrats. An essay on law and values (2 edn.). New York and Basel: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Ross, J. I. (1995). Controlling state crime: An introduction. New York, NY: Garland.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Ross, J. I. (1998). Situating the academic study of controlling state crime. Crime, Law & Social Change, 24(9), 331–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Ross, J. I.(Ed.) (2000). Varieties of state crime and its control. New York, NY: Criminal Justice.

  64. Rynard, P., & Shugarman D. (2000). Cruelty and deception. Ontario, Canada: Broadview.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Scott, R. (1996). Report of the inquiry into the export of defense equipment and ual-use equipment goods to Iraq and related prosecutions. HMSO.

  66. The Dutch Safety Board (2006). Brand Cellencomplex Schiphol-Oost, Eindrapport van het onderzoek naar de brand in het detentie-en uitzetcentrum Schiphol-Oost in de nacht van 26 op 27 Oktober 2005. The Hague: The Dutch Safety Board (available at http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/publicaties/ovv/rapport_schipholbrand.pdf).

  67. Van den Berg, E. A. I. M. (2002). Organisatiecriminaliteit. The Hague, The Netherlands: WODC (with the cooperation of Aidala, R., & Beenakkers, E. M. Th.).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Van den Heuvel, G. A. A. J. (1998). Collusie tussen overheid en bedrijf. Een vergeten hoofdstuk uit de organisatiecriminologie. Maastricht: Maastricht University.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Van den Heuvel, J. H. L., Huberts, L. W. J. C., & Verberk, S. (1999). Integriteit in drievoud. Een ondezoek naar gemeentelijk integriteitsbeleid. Utrecht: Lemma.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Van Montfort, A. J. G. M. (1991). De regels van het huis. Ambtelijke regeltoepassing bij de gemeentelijke woonruimteverdeling. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Voogd, H. (2004). Disaster prevention in urban environments. European Journal of Spatial Development (12) (available at http://www.henkvoogd.nl/pdf/refereed12.pdf).

  72. Weisburd, D., & Waring, E. (2001). White collar crime and criminal careers. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  73. West, M., & Sheaff, R. (1994). Back to basics. Health Service Journal, 104(5391), 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Wolmar, C. (2001). Broken rails: How privatisation wrecked Britain’s railways. London, UK: Aurum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article is part of a research project that was made possible through a subsidy by the steering group and program ‘Handhaven op Niveau’ (Proper Rule and Law Enforcement). Most of the research was done by Suzan Verberk MSc and Stephan Berndsen MSc LL.M. Other members of the research team, besides the authors of this article, were Professor Hans van den Heuvel, Wim Huisman PhD and Miriam Vermeulen (project secretary). The project was supervised by a committee of experts, appointed by the program. The committee was chaired by Professor Tineke Cleiren (Law Faculty Leiden University) and members were Bert Niemeijer PhD (Knowledge Centre WODC of the Ministry of Justice), Professor Paul ‘t Hart (Public Administration, Utrecht University), Kees Riezebos LL.M. (Ministry of the Interior), Ton de Lange LL.M. (Public Prosecutor), Willem Blanken LL.M. (former mayor of the city of Ede) and Martin Hagen MA (program director Proper Rule and Law Enforcement). The authors are very grateful for everybody’s involvement in the research project. In 2005 the research report (in Dutch) was presented: ‘Overtredende Overheden’ (Rule Breaking Government), a book published by Boom Juridische uitgevers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leo W. J. C. Huberts.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huberts, L.W.J.C., van Montfort, A.J.G.M., Doig, A. et al. Rule-making, rule-breaking? Law breaking by government in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Crime Law Soc Change 46, 133–159 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-006-9050-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-006-9050-4

Keywords

Navigation