|
|
TWO GLARING ERRORS IN THE 5 JUNE 2008 DECISION
OF THE HAGUE DISTRICT COURT ON MY COMPLAINT
By Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Plaintiff
7 June 2008
I am pleased that the District of Court of The Hague in its 5 June 2008
decision on my complaint against the prolongation of the investigation
of the false charges of murder against me and my demand for the end
of such investigation has done the following:
First, it acknowledges all the decisions of the District Court of The Hague
on 13 September 2007, the Court of Appeal of The Hague on 3 October
2007 and the examining judge on 21 November 2007 as having ruled
that there is no prima facie evidence against me; and
Second, it declares that the content of the case file offers up to now
insufficient concrete indications for my direct involvement in the acts
charged against me and that on the basis of the material as evidence
presented up to now by the public prosecutor's office it is highly improbable
that a judge would convict me.
But the same District Court of The Hague makes a decision to let the
Public Prosecution Office to continue with its investigation on the basis
of two glaring errors:
First, it claims falsely that my lawyer Michiel Pestman withdrew our plea to
the court to impose a deadline on the prosecutor for its investigation. On
the contrary, Mr. Pestman emphatically reminded the court at the 20 May
2008 hearing to require the prosecutor to comply with the deadline of mid-June
2008 which she had previously asked for. He demanded that the prosecutor
stop the investigation and instead investigate those involved in the assassination
attempts against me in the period of 1999 to 2001.
Second, the court deliberately misrepresents the decision of the examining
judge on 21 November 2007 to close the preliminary investigation. It falsely
claims that the examining judge had already approved the demand of the
prosecutor to hear a number of witnesses for the prosecution. In fact, the
examining judge refused to grant the demand of the prosecutor to hear
anonymous witnesses A and B in view of the decisions of the District Court
of The Hague on 13 September 2007 and the Court of Appeal on 3 October
2007 to keep me out of detention for lack of prima facie evidence against me.
In its 5 June 2008 decision, the District Court of The Hague goes overboard
by allowing the prosecutor to "continue and complete the investigation"
without any deadline and without limit to the number of witnesses to be
heard and the materials to be examined. Thus, I am subjected to a prolonged
state of oppression, intimidation and insecurity.
According to the case file, the Dutch and Philippine authorities have been
collaborating in seeking to oppress and criminalize me since 26 January 2005
when a team of Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo met with
Justice Minister Donner in The Netherlands. The political manipulation of criminal
investigation started much earlier than the initial interrogation of the Filipino
false witnesses supplied by Philippine authorities to the Dutch investigators in
January 2006.
The court that made the wrong decision on 5 June 2008 in The Hague consisted
of H. P. M. Meskers, chairman, M. I. Veldt-Foglia and R. J. A. Schaaf. ###
|
|