Academic Bibliography

 Search 200 years of publications by Ghent University researchers.
Advanced search
1 file | 803.43 KB
Add to list
  1. Search results
  2. Radicalisation : a concept in judicia...

Radicalisation : a concept in judicial reasoning?

Stéphanie De Coensel (UGent)
(2025) Unraveling radicalisation : exploring concepts, contexts, and perspectives.
Author
Organization
Project
Abstract
The radicalisation process is often portrayed in the literature as a pathway. Whilst the author previously developed a meta-framework that embodies the current state of research on phase models of radicalisation (De Coensel, 2018), no research has been conducted on the use and operationalisation of these phases in the courtroom. This chapter therefore examines to what extent and how the concept of radicalisation is used to motivate the conviction of terrorist offenders by conducting a systematic, qualitative content analysis of 33 Belgian court rulings pronounced between 2012 and 2017 on terrorism-related acts. The analysis reveals that, while phase models of radicalisation are not explicitly referenced in judicial reasoning, courts implicitly rely on elements from these models, such as social ties, cognitive factors, and attitudes towards violence, to assess ideological convictions and infer terrorist intentions from these convictions. Although the analysis also sheds light on the trajectories of convicted terrorist offenders, court rulings often lack detail on the early stages of radicalisation, limiting their suitability for empirically testing theoretical models like the meta-framework.

Downloads

  • Download
    (...).pdf
    • full text (Accepted manuscript)
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 803.43 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
De Coensel, Stéphanie. “Radicalisation : A Concept in Judicial Reasoning?” Unraveling Radicalisation : Exploring Concepts, Contexts, and Perspectives, edited by Gilbert McLaughlin and Antoinette Huber, Palgrave Macmillan, 2025.
APA
De Coensel, S. (2025). Radicalisation : a concept in judicial reasoning? In G. McLaughlin & A. Huber (Eds.), Unraveling radicalisation : exploring concepts, contexts, and perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chicago author-date
De Coensel, Stéphanie. 2025. “Radicalisation : A Concept in Judicial Reasoning?” In Unraveling Radicalisation : Exploring Concepts, Contexts, and Perspectives, edited by Gilbert McLaughlin and Antoinette Huber. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
De Coensel, Stéphanie. 2025. “Radicalisation : A Concept in Judicial Reasoning?” In Unraveling Radicalisation : Exploring Concepts, Contexts, and Perspectives, ed by. Gilbert McLaughlin and Antoinette Huber. Palgrave Macmillan.
Vancouver
1.
De Coensel S. Radicalisation : a concept in judicial reasoning? In: McLaughlin G, Huber A, editors. Unraveling radicalisation : exploring concepts, contexts, and perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan; 2025.
IEEE
[1]
S. De Coensel, “Radicalisation : a concept in judicial reasoning?,” in Unraveling radicalisation : exploring concepts, contexts, and perspectives, G. McLaughlin and A. Huber, Eds. Palgrave Macmillan, 2025.
@incollection{01JHSSY8GF7MJH9XM6JRB5WGDG,
  abstract     = {{The radicalisation process is often portrayed in the literature as a pathway. Whilst the author previously developed a meta-framework that embodies the current state of research on phase models of radicalisation (De Coensel, 2018), no research has been conducted on the use and operationalisation of these phases in the courtroom. This chapter therefore examines to what extent and how the concept of radicalisation is used to motivate the conviction of terrorist offenders by conducting a systematic, qualitative content analysis of 33 Belgian court rulings pronounced between 2012 and 2017 on terrorism-related acts. The analysis reveals that, while phase models of radicalisation are not explicitly referenced in judicial reasoning, courts implicitly rely on elements from these models, such as social ties, cognitive factors, and attitudes towards violence, to assess ideological convictions and infer terrorist intentions from these convictions. Although the analysis also sheds light on the trajectories of convicted terrorist offenders, court rulings often lack detail on the early stages of radicalisation, limiting their suitability for empirically testing theoretical models like the meta-framework.}},
  author       = {{De Coensel, Stéphanie}},
  booktitle    = {{Unraveling radicalisation : exploring concepts, contexts, and perspectives}},
  editor       = {{McLaughlin, Gilbert and Huber, Antoinette}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{Palgrave Macmillan}},
  title        = {{Radicalisation : a concept in judicial reasoning?}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}