Policing the corona crisis: A comparison between France and the Netherlands

Author:

Terpstra Jan1ORCID,de Maillard Jacques2ORCID,Salet Renze1,Roché Sebastian3

Affiliation:

1. Radboud University, the Netherlands

2. Centre de recherches sociologiques sur le droit et les institutions pénales, France; Université de Versailles-Saint-Quentin, France

3. University Grenoble-Alpes, Sciences Po Grenoble, CNRS, France

Abstract

The policing of measures to control the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a core aspect of the current corona crisis. This article concentrates on differences in policing the corona crisis in France and the Netherlands. There are huge differences in policing the corona crisis between the two jurisdictions: France with a very strict, repressive approach, and the Netherlands with a more pragmatic, communicative and responsibilizing style. These differences can be understood by looking at the underlying frames about the relationship between state and citizens. The differences in frames about the relationship between police and citizens are more or less similar between the two countries. In France, the dominant frame is of policing as a matter of ‘force’ and ‘war’; the Dutch policing style is framed in terms of responsibilization, communication and persuasion. Despite these important differences, there are also similarities. In both countries there have been fundamental criticisms of the legal basis of the corona measures and of the way that these have been policed. The issues of protest and criticism are often related to the specific dominating frames, in a paradoxical way. The Dutch approach, with its emphasis on proximity, communication and shared responsibilities, may be more effective in realizing compliance with the anti-corona rules than the French one, with its distrust of citizens, use of sanctions and war-like rhetoric. The question is raised of whether the Dutch approach will also be successful if awareness of the dangers of the virus and of the importance of self-control declines.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Law

Reference21 articles.

Cited by 13 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3