Fighting organised crime requires thorough determination of the course

Learning from past experiences

An important conclusion is that the government insufficiently learns from previous lessons about fighting organised crime. Karin van Wingerde, Professor of Corporate Crime and Governance at Erasmus School of Law, explains: “We try the same thing every time. For instance, virtually every study of drug related organised crime over the past decades has concluded that too few people with financial economic expertise work within the criminal investigation department. Despite good intentions to do something about it, little to nothing happens in practice.”

Cooperation is essential, but should not be an end in itself

While good cooperation between various private and public sector actors is an indispensable ingredient to successfully tackle organised crime, the researchers argue that cooperation has sometimes become too much of an end in itself. “Many government organisations are collaborating without prior consideration of whether that is necessary for the goal in question”, Lieselot Bisschop, professor of Public and Private Interests at Erasmus School of Law, explains. As a result, she says, cooperation risks becoming a “mantra”. 

Van Wingerde and Bisschop, therefore, call on all parties involved in the approach to organised crime, including politicians to reconsider the fundamental principles of this approach. This can help develop a more efficient and effective approach aimed at tackling all forms of organised crime that harm society.

Broadening the view of the problem

First, the researchers argue for a broader view of the problem of drug related organised crime. “It should not only concern drug crime but also other relevant forms of crime and societal challenges that relate to organised crime. Think of human trafficking, labour exploitation, environmental crime or cybercrime, but also white-collar crime”, they argue. In addition, according to Van Wingerde and Bisschop, more attention should be paid to the cross-border aspects of organised crime and intensifying cooperation with neighbouring countries. Also, the (fashion) term of ‘subversive’ crime (‘undermining’, ‘ondermijning’ in Dutch) should be replaced by the term organised crime. According to the researchers, the latter provides better guidance, certainly in the international debate.

Adjust foundational principles, mutual structure, and the role of the Public Prosecution Office

Secondly, Van Wingerde and Bisschop recommend recalibrating the foundation of the approach. For example, the objectives of a project should determine which parties collaborate with each other. “Not everything and everyone needs to be connected and consulted, as frequently as it happens now”, Van Wingerde explains. It also calls for reflection on the structure of investigations and how the Police, Royal Netherlands Marechaussee and four special investigation services relate to each other. After all, they are increasingly working in each other's fields, while the foundational model assumes that these organisations operate side by side. According to the researchers, the Public Prosecution Service should also claim a more visible role in the approach. In addition to directing the investigative process, the Public Prosecution Service can also stimulate public debate about a balance between security and the protection of the rights of individual citizens.

Finally, the researchers advocate for making working for the government more attractive. In this way, expertise needed for the further development of the approach to organised crime, such as data analysis, intelligence, finance, and leadership, can be sustainably linked to the projects.