The farce around the prosecution of Joris Demmink (3)

Attorney Adèle van der Plas

Now let us examine how truthful Mr. Demmink is in saying that he has not traveled to Turkey since 1986. This is important because it is his alibi for the sexual abuse of under aged Turkish boys during the 199o’s. That is why the court also ordered an investigation into this alibi. If his alibi is a lie, it is practically proof that Mr. Demmink is guilty as charged. When we look at Mr. Demmink’s career we can see that he was the Director General of International Affairs and Immigration from 1993 to 2002. He headed this divison of the Justice Department for nine years. As such he was responsible for our immigration and asylum policies. What is the country that Holland receives the most immigrants from? Right! Turkey. By far the number 1 spot, followed by Morocco.  Turks in Holland may be compared with Mexicans in America. We also receive a lot of asylum seekers from Kurdistan, especially the Turkish and Iraqi parts, and especially during the 90’s when Saddam Hussein’s policies were close to genocide.

So how likely is it that Mr. Demmink never traveled to Turkey during his 9 years as immigration boss? It goes without saying that this job requires intensive contacts with Turkish government officials. According to Mr. Demmink we have to believe that all these contacts were by phone, fax and mail. Doesn’t that put a strain on our gullibility? Well, at least our minister Opstelten believes it. The question is then if there is any evidence to the contrary. Can we find proof that Mr. Demmink was in Turkey? And is our Justice Department charged with the investigation, really eager to find it? Are they truly searching and how hard? And once they find it, is it then regarded as hard evidence?

Let me first tell something about the so called K4 Committee. It’s a little known advisory club to the European Union, founded in 1993. Little known but rather elite and powerful. It’s comprised of big shots from all over the European Union. Members rotate as well as the chairman. In this article we can find more:

The new structure will be under the control of the K4 Coordinating Committee, a group of senior officials from Interior Ministries, accountable only to the Council of (Interior) Ministers. The K4 Coordinating Committee will also oversee the setting up of the European Information System (EIS) which will hold intelligence and information on immigration, asylum, policing and drugs. Both the ad hoc and new structures give officials (Interior Ministry, police, immigration, customs, and security services) unprecedented access to decision-making. This K4 Committee is currently shadowing the work of Trevi, including Europol, pending the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty. 

The K4 Committee was also specifically tasked with improving relations between the Turks and the Kurds. For example in this paper we read the following:

Also on January 30, 1998, EU interior ministers announced plans to create a safe haven for Kurds somewhere in the Middle East, similar to the safe haven established in northern Iraq after the Gulf war in 1991. The K4 Committee met February 10, 1998, and announced a joint program against alien smuggling. The European Commission is considering a proposal to share the burden of Kurds arriving from Turkey and Iraq. One of the proposals is to set up camps for Kurds in Italy, and then distribute them among the other 15-member nations of the EC.

Guess who was a long time member of the K4 Committee and even its Chairman. Right! None other than our Mr. Joris Demmink. See for example this document from april 1997:

K4 Troika:

        –    Mr Joris Demmink (Netherlands), Chairman

        –    Ms Marjorie Bonn (Netherlands)

        –    Mr Dermot Cole (Ireland), previous Chairman

        –    Mr Henry Mitchell (Ireland)

        –    Mr Guy Schleder (Luxembourg), next Chairman

        –    Mr Marc Mathekowitsch (Luxembourg)

        –    Justice and Home Affairs Counsellors from the Netherlands, Ireland and Luxembourg

All of these people worked closely with Mr. Demmink and can easily testify of his travels to Turkey. Some of them with him. Most of them are still public officials and their contact data are a piece of cake to find on the Internet. Mr. Guy Schleder (Luxembourg) for example can be found here. Mr. Marc Mathekowitsch (Luxembourg) is also everywhere on the Internet, with email address and all. Did the Justice Department try to contact them? Of course not.  I did. Their secretary even told me they had discussed the matter between them. But as soon as these people smell the sensivity of the subject, they shut down. They will only testify under oath before an official government body. Not to a nosy journalist. But it is obvious now that the Justice Department lacks the willingness to contact these people, let alone call them to testify, unless they are forced to. Same for Mrs. Marjorie Bonn, who worked directly under Mr. Demmink for years. She was his advisor and holds a governing position at the University of Maastricht. It’s even highly probable that she accompanied him on one or more trips to Turkey.

It would not even be necessary to call these people. Because the Justice Department was already provided with documentary evidence of Mr. Demmink’s presence in Turkey. Evidence that would rank as ironclad in any normal investigation. See for example this document, translated from the Turkish original, authored by the governor of Istanbul. It lists all the incoming travel dates of Mr. Demmink into Turkey from 1995 to 2002. Among other visits, the document makes clear that he attended the Interpol conferences in Antalya and Ankara in 1996 and 1998. Which is quite logical considering his jobs at the  time. Some of the visits coincide exactly with the dates the Turkish victims claim they were raped by Mr. Demmink.

In her testimony to the Helsinki Commission, attorney Mrs. Adèle van der Plas summarizes it bull’s eye as follows:

I myself represent two Turkish victims who were raped and sexually abused when they were 11 and 14 years old. The perpetrator was a high ranking Dutch government official, nowadays Secretary-General of the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice, Mr. Joris Demmink. I also represent B., who is present today to answer your questions. B. was a victim of the same Dutch high ranking official Mr. Demmink at the time that he, as a young boy of 15 years old, was forced to work in a brothel.

I was informed about the crimes committed by Mr. Demmink in Turkey by official Turkish sources. They informed me that Mr. Demmink in 1995 was caught in the act of sex with minors, in Turkey, while attending a party in Bodrum. At this party, minors were sexually abused. One of the boys tried to escape and created a great deal of commotion,  which brought the police. Mr. Demmink was arrested and subsequently released, after which his criminal file was used to blackmail the Dutch authorities to take action in a case against a Kurdish activist who at the time stayed in the Netherlands. I am also the attorney of this Kurdish businessman, named Mr. Baybasin.

The two well documented criminal charges that were filed against Mr. Demmink by the two Turkish boys Osman B. and Mustafa Y. were never investigated according to Dutch criminal investigative procedures. The same goes for the criminal charges filed by my other client Mr. Baybasin against Mr. Demmink. The victim, who is present today, was in 1998 a  key witness in the so called Rolodex investigation. His statements never led to an investigation, prosecution or conviction of the real perpetrators, the high ranking customers (the Dutch Super Elite) of the numerous minor brothels in our capital Amsterdam, at the time.

The question arises what is going on in the Netherlands?  In your 2012 report on human trafficking, you recognized the Netherlands as a tier 1 status country, in full compliance with the minimum standards to combat trafficking in persons. My experience in the four cases I represent is completely different. High ranking government officials and politicians in the Netherlands seem to form a privileged elite, who are above the law when they sexually abuse minors, and will never be arrested, tried or convicted.

The criminal charges filed by Mustafa against Demmink were never investigated.  The Dutch authorities dismissed the allegations, after demanding that Mustafa first had to travel to the Netherlands to officially answer their questions. Meanwhile the boy was heavily threatened and abused in Turkey (his tongue was cut with a razor blade), in an effort to quash his complaint.[3]  The boy was approached by the then high ranking police chief Emin Arslan who offered him  a good life in case he withdrew his charges against Demmink. If not, the boy’s life would be destroyed. The boy was frightened to death but never withdrew his charges against Demmink.

The second Turkish boy Osman traveled to the Netherlands, where he was interrogated by Dutch investigators, in February 2011. However, a thorough criminal investigation was never initiated in his case. Five witnesses with direct knowledge about this crime were waiting in Turkey to be interviewed by Dutch prosecutors, but they were ignored, until now.  The Turkish policeman Mehmet Korkmaz who was Demmink’s security officer during the Secretary-General’s visits to Turkey and who has since admitted kidnapping minor boys for Demmink to abuse, offered to be heard by Dutch police in Turkey, despite risks to his personal safety. No one ever contacted him. His testimony can be seen on the video presented to this hearing and on our website[4]. The same goes for the former chief of the Istanbul police, Necdet Menzir (also former Minister of Transport in Turkey), who was also willing to testify about Demmink’s visits to Turkey in the 1990s and the fact that his police officers were ordered to protect Demmink. No one ever contacted him, either. Subsequently also the offer of a third Turkish boy, Yacine, who said to have been sexually abused by Demmink, in 1995 in Bodrum, was ignored by the Dutch authorities.

Despite this overwhelming amount of available primary witnesses, the criminal charges filed by Osman and Mustafa never led to an official criminal investigation as defined in the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure. The prosecutors persisted that there were insufficient grounds to call Mr. Demmink a suspect and to start an official criminal investigation against him. Only a so-called  ‘exploratory’ investigation was conducted, that is not accepted by the Dutch code of criminal procedure. And without an official criminal investigation based on the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure, the “hands of the prosecutors were completely tied”, according to their own words. Without an official suspect and criminal investigation, the prosecutors lacked the authority to travel to Turkey to interrogate the available witnesses and to properly investigate the data of Demmink’s official and non-official trips in the 1990s.

In the Netherlands, where it only takes an anonymous tip to initiate not only a criminal  investigation, but also police actions such as arrest and house searches, the reaction of the prosecutor on this matter can be called quite absurd.

 

 

Over Wim Dankbaar

researcher/publicist/ondernemer
Dit bericht werd geplaatst in Uncategorized en getagged met . Maak dit favoriet permalink.

6 reacties op The farce around the prosecution of Joris Demmink (3)

  1. yvonne zegt:

    Deels off topic, maar deze hoort er bij…………..

    Eén van de grootste mysteries uit de moderne Amerikaanse geschiedenis is nog altijd onopgehelderd: de moord op JFK.

    Voor Robert Groden is het duidelijk: hij heeft zijn hele leven gewijd aan het bewijzen van zijn theorie dat de Amerikaanse president J.F. Kennedy op 22 november 1963 door een samenzwering is omgebracht en niet door die ene schutter, Harvey Lee Oswald, zoals de geschiedenis ons wil doen geloven.

    Tot op de dag van vandaag, ruim vijftig jaar na dato, blijft Groden onvermoeibaar zoeken naar bewijsmateriaal, dat hij vervolgens in zijn overvolle huis in Dallas bewaart. Hij schuwt ook niet tekst en uitleg te geven achter een tafeltje op Dealey Plaza, het plein waar de moord plaatsvond, goed in het zicht van ‘cover-up’ museum The Sixth Floor.

    Groden, de man die in 1975 miljoenen kijkers schokte door de zogeheten Zapruder-film ongecensureerd op de Amerikaanse televisie te vertonen, waarmee hij het Congres dwong de zaak te heropenen, ondervindt nog dagelijkse tegenstand van de (plaatselijke) autoriteiten bij zijn pogingen de waarheid aan het licht te krijgen.

    Hij blijft echter gerechtigheid najagen voor de man wiens sterfdag precies samenvalt met zijn verjaardag. Regisseur Kasper Verkaik maakte met respect voor de man en zijn eenmanskruistocht een uitgebalanceerd portret van deze volhouder, die als echtgenoot en vader een hoge prijs betaalde voor zijn zelfgekozen missie.

    http://www.ninefornews.nl/video-man-wijdt-leven-aan-bewijzen-theorie-dat-jfk-door-samenzwering-omgebracht/

  2. Wim Dankbaar zegt:

    29-02-2012
    De Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM) heeft op 9 februari 2012 een last onder dwangsom opgelegd aan de heer L. Glandorf, die handelt onder de naam Prospect Provider. Hij voldoet niet aan informatieverzoeken van de AFM.

    Er is om informatie verzocht, omdat het vermoeden bestaat dat Prospect Provider financiële diensten heeft verleend, of nog steeds verleent, zonder dat het hiervoor een vergunning heeft van de AFM.

    Prospect Provider uit Ridderkerk heeft de verzochte informatie niet binnen de gestelde termijn geleverd en is daarom verplicht de dwangsom te betalen. De verzochte informatie moet nog steeds aan de AFM worden geleverd.

    De volledige beschikking kunt u hiernaast in PDF-formaat downloaden.

    De AFM vraagt het publiek om informatie over Prospect Provider te delen met de AFM. Hiervoor en bij overige vragen of klachten kunt u contact opnemen met het Meldpunt Financiële Markten van de AFM: 0900-5400 540 (0,05 euro per minuut).

    De AFM bevordert eerlijke en transparante financiële markten. Wij zijn de onafhankelijke gedragstoezichthouder op de markten van sparen, lenen, beleggen en verzekeren. De AFM bevordert zorgvuldige financiële dienstverlening aan consumenten en ziet toe op een eerlijke en efficiënte werking van kapitaalmarkten. Ons streven is het vertrouwen van consumenten en bedrijven in de financiële markten te versterken, ook internationaal. Op deze manier draagt de AFM bij aan de welvaart en de economische reputatie van Nederland.

  3. hansjohn zegt:

    Wim en Hans.
    Maaike mocht niet worden opgeroepen om onder ede te verklaren dat hetgeen ze in het zn campingverslag gezegd geeft, waar is.

Geef een reactie

Vul je gegevens in of klik op een icoon om in te loggen.

WordPress.com logo

Je reageert onder je WordPress.com account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Twitter-afbeelding

Je reageert onder je Twitter account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Facebook foto

Je reageert onder je Facebook account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Google+ photo

Je reageert onder je Google+ account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Verbinden met %s