FALSE RESTORATION OF BENEFITS
Letter of Prof. Jose Maria Sison to his Lawyer

11 October 2002

Mr J.M.Langenberg
Schoolplein Advocaten
Postbus 13319
3507 LH Utrecht

Subject: Restoration of Benefits?

Dear Mr Langenberg,

I write to you this letter in connection with the 9 October 2002 letter of Mr Drs C. E. van der Linden, head of the Sociale Zaken & Werkgelegenheid, on behalf of the Mayor and Councilors of Utrecht. This document is supposed to deal with the question of restoring benefits to me.

I am aware that the local officials of Utrecht follow their superiors at the national level. Thus, I hold most responsible the national officials concerned (the prime minister, foreign minister and finance minister) for the contents of the aforesaid document which are misleading and violative of my rights.

First of all, in exchange for the restoration of some benefits, the Dutch authorities are trying to trap me within the obnoxious framework of the sanctieregeling terrorisme III 2002, supposedly involving its Articles 2 and 3. They are trying to make me collaborate with them in my own criminalization and defamation as a "terrorist". They are trying to make me help them smuggle into the Dutch legal system the word "terrorism" as a catch-all and open-ended term for persecuting people.

It is pure malice and superfluity to restore the benefits within the framework of the sanctieregeling terrorisme instead of within the proper legal framework of respecting my right to the presumption of innocence until validly proven otherwise in a court of law, the right to effective due process, the right against being defamed, demonized and being exposed to threats to life due to incitement of public hatred, the right to the basic necessities of life and the basic human right to life.

In the strongest terms, I refuse to accept the framework of the sanctieregeling terrorisme. Until I am recognized as out of this framework or until I am removed from the list of so-called terrorists, I will not accept the poisoned "benefits" being proffered to me. I would rather pursue the legal course of defending my rights up to whatever judicial level possible and in the meantime borrow money from friends in order to survive. I hope that such helping friends will not be likewise subjected to witchhunt as "terrorists" in these times of creeping fascism which masquerades as anti-terrorism.

I do not wish to be trapped in a framework in which I allow myself to be labeled a "terrorist" and yet the Dutch finance minister and his colleagues at the highest level of the Dutch government can terminate or amputate the benefits at anytime for reasons beyond the laws that made them possible. From the very beginning, it is utterly absurd or even perverse for the Dutch authorities to consider as something related to terrorism the benefits previously given to me according to law.

I do not wish to be tricked into accepting some paltry benefits so that the authorities can perpetuate the injustice of criminalizing and demonizing me as a "terrorist", continue

to freeze my joint bank account with my wife and deprive my family of the lawful money deposited therein. In offering to restore the benefits, the authorities make no mention of the money frozen in said bank account and the fact that my family has fallen into arrears with regard to financial obligations for goods and services delivered to us since July 2002.

The authorities offer the resumption of the measly allowance of 201.93 euros for food and other necessities, health insurance and insurance for third party liability. But there is a glaring omission of housing accommodation in the specification of benefits to be restored. At every turn, the authorities give themselves the leeway to keep their prey at their mercy.

The sanctieregeling terrorisme is a hypocritical piece of paper. In the name of anti-terrorism, it takes away from me the benefits for bare subsistence from the state welfare agency. Then, it pretends to give these back on "humanitarian grounds" with the threat that these can be taken away again.

The authorities know no bounds for the punitive actions and harassments that they have undertaken against me. They are well orchestrated. I am now required to report to the Asiel Zoeker Centrum every week instead of every month, which I did for more than a decade. At the same time, the intelligence agencies have become more conspicuously and obtrusively watchful as in a police state.

I hope that this letter of mine can be useful in presenting the truth in a court of law as well as to the public in general.

Thank you for your attention and advice.

Best regards,

Prof. Jose Maria Sison