Dangerously Vague: The Indeterminacy of Dangerousness Criteria of Preventive Sanctions in Dutch Criminal Law

The imposition of preventive sanctions on offenders-ranging from preventive detention to community supervision-generally requires that the offender is held to be "dangerous": a legal "dangerousness criterion" must be met. This article shows that in Dutch criminal law, these dangerousness criteria are vague. They fail to define, or define in an insufficiently precise way, the type, severity, probability, and time frame of future harm that must be established to fulfill the dangerousness criterion. Drawing on theory on vagueness in law, it is argued that vague dangerousness criteria are undesirable. The vagueness of these criteria renders the decision of whether they are satisfied discretionary. Consequently, courts possess an almost unrestricted power to impose preventive sanctions on offenders. This is incompatible with the rule of law and increases the risk of the overuse of these sanctions. It is therefore advocated that clearer, more precise dangerousness criteria are needed in the Netherlands.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavioral Sciences & the Law
Published
2026-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.70101
Primary Topic
Criminal Law and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dangerously Vague: The Indeterminacy of Dangerousness Criteria of Preventive Sanctions in Dutch Criminal Law

Max de Vries
Behavioral Sciences & the Law
Criminal Law and Policy
article

Dangerously Vague: The Indeterminacy of Dangerousness Criteria of Preventive Sanctions in Dutch Criminal Law

Max de Vries
article en

Abstract

The imposition of preventive sanctions on offenders-ranging from preventive detention to community supervision-generally requires that the offender is held to be "dangerous": a legal "dangerousness criterion" must be met. This article shows that in Dutch criminal law, these dangerousness criteria are vague. They fail to define, or define in an insufficiently precise way, the type, severity, probability, and time frame of future harm that must be established to fulfill the dangerousness criterion. Drawing on theory on vagueness in law, it is argued that vague dangerousness criteria are undesirable. The vagueness of these criteria renders the decision of whether they are satisfied discretionary. Consequently, courts possess an almost unrestricted power to impose preventive sanctions on offenders. This is incompatible with the rule of law and increases the risk of the overuse of these sanctions. It is therefore advocated that clearer, more precise dangerousness criteria are needed in the Netherlands.

Behavioral Sciences & the Law
University of Groningen (NL)
Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Criminal Law and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.