By rephrasing and reshaping specific criminal justice and security policies, the Dutch government has been struggling for a while in trying to find its course on how to address crime problems in its multicultural society in a politically correct – non discriminatory – way. In this article we focus on government selectivity by examining the development of criminal justice policy in the Netherlands. To what extent does the government take a stand in favor of or against special – and therefore selective – attention for people with a minority background?

The main question of this contribution is whether the use of ethnic profiling in migration control is an infringement of the prohibition of racial and religious discrimination. To answer this question, the regulation on migration control is analyzed and the trend of mixing criminal law with migration law is criticized. The influence of quota of irregular migrants who should be expelled and penalizing of illegal residence is studied. Taken into account the jurisprudence on the issue, the author argues that profiling based on race and religion is forbidden, which is also the case if nationality is used in profiles against EU-citizens.

Several reports and publications criticise the Dutch police for discriminating against minorities during stop-and-search actions. This article argues that discrimination can be found in the police but not to the extent that the critics suggest. Recent research on stop-and-search practices in a large Dutch city suggests that the police treat youth with a minority background differently but that they don’t treat them unequally. The article concludes with a warning against the use of the expression ethnic profiling, because it hinders correction of discrimination by the police.

In the Netherlands, the debate around police profiling has been rather low key – until recently. Now it has turned into a heated discussion with a clear focus on ethnic profiling. This extensive international literature review aims to show that there is more to profiling than just ethnicity. Factors such as behavior and the vehicle someone is driving can be just as important as a person’s looks. The results of this study put profiling in perspective and level the playing field of the debate, in which the side of the organizations using profiling has not gotten enough attention until now.

This article explores the ways in which the work of the police is influenced by ideas about gender. Even though there is a long tradition of doing research about selectivity of the control agencies of criminal law, criminology has hardly had any attention for this topic. The main purpose of this article is to find out the meaning of the theoretical concept of gender for the social control of crime by the police and to give some examples for illustration. First of all, the article takes into consideration any crucial aspects of the process of selectivity.

The Dutch abbreviation ‘ZSM’ literally means ASAP. In the Dutch criminal justice system, it stands for a response to a crime ‘as speedy, selective, smart and supportive for victims as possible’. The project was initiated by the Public Prosecution Service and the Police, and it also involves the Dutch Probation Services, Victim Support Netherlands and the Child Care and Protection Board. The goal of ZSM is to assure meaningful and fast interventions, based on quality and effectiveness for society, including suspects and victims. To reach this goal, the Public Prosecutor is situated at the front of the criminal justice chain and triages the high volume crimes to determine the best procedure for a case, in cooperation with the partners.

ASAP: As Soon (or Selective, Smart) As Possible is meant to be a form of summary justice, in March 2011 introduced by the Dutch Public Prosecution Service (PPS). ASAP is meant to handle common criminality more rapidly and more effectively. So far, so good. However, the PPS seems to direct all efforts to velocity instead of quality. ASAP was established without interference of defense lawyers. Lawyers, criminal law scientists and National Ombudsman have been criticizing ASAP since its introduction. Values of legal protection, accuracy and sustainability are ignored by velocity. Nowadays, the PPS desires cooperation with defense lawyers in the ASAP method. First of all: it is not easy to climb aboard a driving train. Suspects must be advised and acquainted by lawyers, not by prosecutors or police officers. Equality of arms must be guaranteed. A quick access to the criminal file is one of the demands for a serious and active role of lawyers in the ASAP approach.

In order to support desistance from crime and rehabilitation into society, the probation service has to adapt its service to the individual problems and strengths of offenders. As a result, offenders who have committed similar crimes but differ in the problems related to their offending behavior are approached differently. However, equal treatment of offenders by the probation service is important if their problems are comparable. In this article the results are described of a study about the level of agreement between probation officers about intervention plans. In addition, it was studied whether the use of an instrument for structured decision making improves agreement about these plans.