The effects of changes in the social domain

The Faculty of Law values the social relevance of its scientific research. This relevance is best ensured by collaborating with companies, governments and organizations on real-world issues, for example with the GAK Institute.

Case: The consequences of the changes in the social domain

The GAK Institute commissioned research into the consequences of the changes in the social domain. The research was conducted by Prof. A.M. (Aline) Klingenberg, Prof. S.A.J. (Solke) Munneke, Prof. A. (Albertjan) Tollenaar and Prof. G.J. (Gijsbert) Vonk (editor and project leader).

Research question

In recent years, Dutch municipalities have been given more freedom to develop their own policies in social support and social assistance. Municipalities are also given more freedom to determine what kind of care and support is provided to individual citizens (customization). This study examined the consequences of these changes for the functioning of the rule of law. Decentralizations in social domain require major maintenance of system of legal protection.

The study concludes that a year after the introduction of the decentralizations in the social domain, structural weaknesses have become apparent that need to be corrected. The courts can be helpful in this regard. The researchers also conclude that there should be a (collective) complaints procedure about the violation of fundamental social rights at the Human Rights Board.

Bottlenecks

A number of bottlenecks emerged from the study. First, the legal relationship between the citizen and the government has deteriorated. This should become more informal and accessible, but in practice this change is mainly used to implement cutbacks with less legal resistance. From the citizen's perspective, this is not an improvement. For example, the City of Amsterdam believes that citizens cannot go to the administrative courts in disputes about the number of hours of domestic help.

Second, differences occur between municipalities that cannot be easily explained even within the decentralized unitary state. This is because they have nothing to do with regional particularities or conscious political choices at the local level. Such differences, as occur, for example, in the levying of co-payments for health care, are considered unjust as they are literally insufficiently justifiable.

Third, it appears that privacy protection at municipalities is substandard, without the national government providing unambiguous guidelines on how municipalities can improve this situation.

And finally, there is a risk that municipal services will disappear as a result of internal competition between a variety of policy goals. These bottlenecks affect those who have the least easy time getting along in life, such as youth with behavioral problems, the homeless, the disabled, dropouts, addicts and long-term welfare recipients.

More powers of judge

To help combat the bottlenecks, the courts must be given more powers to review municipalities' actions. An expansion of legal protection sends a counter signal to contemporary social policy that is constantly seeking to weaken the legal position of citizens.

Furthermore, the researchers favor a (collective) complaints procedure on the violation of fundamental social rights at the Human Rights Board. Such a procedure can function as a suitable alarm system for inadequate municipal social policy, where the state wants to loosen the reins in terms of (financial) supervision.

Finally, courts should critically assess differences in implementation between municipalities. Where there is in fact a national policy that is enforced by all kinds of instruments and mutual differences in the implementation of this policy are at most accidental, there is reason for the court to intervene.

More information

Download the full research report
Contact: Prof. Gijsbert Vonk