Samenvatting

The primary objective of the ISD Order is to reduce public nuisance caused by extremely persistent offenders. Another objective is to reduce recidivism. Recidivism can be prevented by influencing behaviour, with due regard to any personal issues involved. In this article the author looks at the arguments the judiciary uses to impose or end an ISD Order. The author notices that the judiciary views ISD Orders as a last resort: an order is given only in the absence of alternatives, and with the requirement attached that ISD subjects are to be put on a programme. The judiciary considers rehabilitation within an ISD framework to be extremely important. The orders are almost invariably imposed for two years, with no deduction of the pretrial detention period. There is reason to terminate the order if the recidivism risk has receded, but there may be other termination grounds, outside the control of the ISD subject, such as negligence on the part of a government agency.