Crime, Law and Social Change

, Volume 46, Issue 3, pp 133–159

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

  • Leo W. J. C. Huberts
  • André J. G. M. van Montfort
  • Alan Doig
  • Denis Clark
Article

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.

References

  1. 1.
    Adams, G. B., & Balfour, D. L. (2004). Unmasking administrative evil. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe (revised edition).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Audit Commission (1994). Protecting the public purse 2: Ensuring probity in the NHS. Audit Commission.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Audit Commission (2005). Public interest report: Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council. Audit Commission.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Audit Commission (2005). Ethical governance in local government in England. London: Audit Commission.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baer, J., & Chambliss, W. J. (1997). Generating fear: The politics of crime reporting. Crime, Law and Social Change, 27(2), 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bull, M. J., & Newell, J. L. (Eds.) (2003). Corruption in contemporary politics. Houndsmill, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cirell, J., & Bennett, S. Point of law – Back in the line of fire (available at http://www.cipfa.org.uk/publicfinance).
  8. 8.
    Commissie Bestuursrechtelijke en Privaatrechtelijke handhaving (1998). Handhaven op niveau. Deventer, The Netherlands: W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Committee of Public Accounts (2002). The operation and wind-up of Teesside Development Corporation. (HC57, 2002).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Committee on Standards in Public Life (2005). Getting the balance right. implementing standards of conduct in public life. London, Tenth Report 6407.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cooke, S. (2001). Corruption resistance strategies: Researching risks in local government. Research findings. Sydney, Australia: ICAC.Google Scholar
  12. 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.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cunningham, N., Grabosky, P., & Sinclair, D. (1999). Smart regulation: designing environmental policy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Ridder, J. (2005). Een goede raad voor toezicht. The Hague, The Netherlands: Boom Juridische uitgevers.Google Scholar
  15. 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. 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. 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. 18.
    Doig, A., & Wilson, J. (1998). What price new public management? Political Quarterly, 69(3), 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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. 20.
    Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., Fitzgerald, L., & Pettigrew, A. (1996). The new public management in action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fijnaut, C., & Huberts, L. (Eds.) (2002). Corruption, integrity and law enforcement. Dordrecht: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Finney, H. C., & Lesieur, H. R. (1982). A contingency theory of organizational crime. In Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1, 255–299.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Flynn, N. (1997). Public sector management (3rd ed., p. 107). Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall/Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Frederickson, H. G.(1999). Ethics and the new managerialism. Public Administration & Management, 4(2), 299–324.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Friedrichs, D. O. (1996). Trusted criminals. White collar crime in contemporary society. Belmont (etc.): Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  26. 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. 27.
    Green, P. (2005). Disaster by design, corruption, construction and catastrophe. The British Journal of Criminology, 44(4), 528–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Green, P., & Ward T. (2004). State crime. London, UK: Pluto.Google Scholar
  29. 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. 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. 31.
    Harrow, J., & Gillett, R. (1994). The proper conduct of public business. Public Money and Management, 14(2), 4–5.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Heywood, P. (Ed.) (1997). Political corruption. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  33. 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).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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. 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. 36.
    Huisman, W. (2001). Tussen winst en moraal. Achtergronden van regelnaleving en regelovertreding door ondernemingen. Den Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jones, P. (2004). Fraud and corruption in public services. A guide to risk and prevention. Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
  38. 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. 39.
    Kagan, R. A. (1978). Regulatory justice. Implementing a wage–price freeze. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kaptein, M., & Wempe J. (2002). The balanced company: A theory of corporate integrity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kauzlarich, D., Matthews, R. A., & Miller, W. J. (2001). Toward a victimology of state crime. Critical Criminology, 10, 173–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kauzlarich, D., Mullins, C. W., & Matthews, R. A. (2003). A complicity continuum of state crime. Contemporary Justice Review, 6(3), 241–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 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. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lane, J., & Petersilia, J. (Eds.) (1998). Criminal justice policy. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Maguire M., Morgan, R., & Reiner, R. (1997). The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  48. 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. 49.
    Muncie, J., McLaughlin E., & Langan, M. (1996). Criminological perspectives. A reader. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    National Audit Office (1994). The sports council. HC131. London, UK: HMSO.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    National Audit Office (1998). Special Compliance Office: Prevention of Corruption. HC 1058. TSO.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    National Audit Office (2001). Inappropriate adjustments to NHS waiting lists. HC 452. London, UK: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  53. 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. 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. 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.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Punch, M. Conduct unbecoming (1985). The social construction of police deviance and control. London/New York: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Punch, M. (1996). Dirty business: Exploring corporate misconduct. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  58. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Roef, D. (2001). Strafbare overheden. Een rechtsvergelijkende studie naar de strafrechtelijke aansprakelijkheid van overheden voor milieuverstoring. Antwerpen: Intersentia.Google Scholar
  60. 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. 61.
    Ross, J. I. (1995). Controlling state crime: An introduction. New York, NY: Garland.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ross, J. I. (1998). Situating the academic study of controlling state crime. Crime, Law & Social Change, 24(9), 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ross, J. I.(Ed.) (2000). Varieties of state crime and its control. New York, NY: Criminal Justice.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Rynard, P., & Shugarman D. (2000). Cruelty and deception. Ontario, Canada: Broadview.Google Scholar
  65. 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.Google Scholar
  66. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 72.
    Weisburd, D., & Waring, E. (2001). White collar crime and criminal careers. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    West, M., & Sheaff, R. (1994). Back to basics. Health Service Journal, 104(5391), 26–29.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Wolmar, C. (2001). Broken rails: How privatisation wrecked Britain’s railways. London, UK: Aurum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leo W. J. C. Huberts
    • 1
  • André J. G. M. van Montfort
    • 2
  • Alan Doig
    • 3
  • Denis Clark
    • 4
  1. 1.Public Administration and Organization ScienceVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Public Administration and Organization ScienceVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Public Services Management and Head of the Fraud Management Studies Unit at Teesside Business SchoolUniversity of TeessideMiddlesbroughUK
  4. 4.Criminology GroupUniversity of LincolnLincolnUK

Personalised recommendations