PHILIPSBURG:--- After 12 long years of being accused of several crimes now suspended Member of Parliament Claudius Buncamper has had his day in court on May 30th, 2022 when the joint court of appeals fully acquits Buncamper of all charges since the prosecution could not prove its case.
The verdict that was handed down on Monday has been freely translated below.
While the Buncampers were able to clear their names after 12 years of judicial persecution, former Minister Maria Buncamper Molanus was forced to resign when the investigation started as there appeared to be a semblance of conflict of interest. At the time Maria Buncamper Molanus was an elected MP that gave up her seat in parliament to serve as Minister under the Democratic Party.
verdict
Referred after being referred back to the Court by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands in a judgment of 16 March 2021 in the criminal case against the suspect:
Claudius Anthony BUNCAMPER, born on May 3, 1963 in Sint Maarten,
living in Sint Maarten, 16 Ponnum Drive.
The process
In its verdict, the Court acquitted the accused of the charges against the summons with prosecutor's office number 100.00464/14 under 5 and 6 and the charges against the summons with prosecutor's office number 100.00464/14 (II) and with regard to the charges on the summons with prosecutor's office number 100.00464 /14 under 1, 2 primary, 3 and 4 primary, sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 12 months, fully probation, and community service consisting of community service for a period of 240 hours, to be replaced by 120 days in prison.
The accused has appealed against this verdict. In a judgment of 15 October 2018, the Court acquitted the accused of the second cumulative / alternative, on the summons with public prosecutor number 100.00464/14,
offense 2, offense 3, offense 4, offense 5, and offense 6 and of the charge on the summons with public prosecutor's office number 100.0464/14 (II). The Court has proved it declares the indictment on the summons with public prosecutor's office number 100.00464/14 under 1 first of all cumulative / alternative (actual leadership of acts in violation of article 49 of the General National Ordinance National Taxes, committed several times). The Court has given the accused - in short
- sentenced to a fine of NAf 25,000 and 240 hours of community service.
The accused has lodged an appeal in cassation against this judgment with the Supreme Court of the Netherlands. The defendant's appeal in cassation contained a plea that consisted of several complaints, which plea was exclusively directed against the above-mentioned finding of evidence of the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court annulled the judgment of the Court of Appeal by judgment of 16 March 2021, insofar as this was subject to the judgment of the Supreme Court. In doing so, the Supreme Court has considered that the complaint directed against the Court of Appeal's judgment that the suspect has actually led Eco Green N.V.'s intentionally incorrect and incomplete filing of the 2009 profit tax return for 2009, 2010 and 2011.
Parquet numbers:100.00464/14 and 100.00464/14 (II)
2
succeeds, so that the remainder of the plea against the finding of evidence by the Court no longer needs to be discussed.
After annulling the judgment of the Court of Appeal in so far as it is subject to the judgment of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court referred the case back to the Court of Appeal.
Investigation of the case
The Supreme Court annulled the judgment of the Court of Appeal of 15 October 2018 insofar as it was subject to the judgment of the Supreme Court. This means that the declaration of proven provenance by the Court of the first cumulative/alternative charge on the summons with public prosecutor's office number 100.00464/14 under 1 has been annulled. Thus, the judgment of the Court of First Instance is before the Court of Justice in so far as it relates to the cumulative / alternatively tested indictment with public prosecutor number 100.00464/14 under 1 first.
This judgment was rendered in response to the investigation at the hearing on 11 May 2022.
The Court has taken cognizance of the claim of the Attorney General, Mr. R.H. den Haan, and of what the suspect and his counsel, Mr. J.G. Flower, have been brought forward.
The Attorney General has argued that it cannot be proven that the suspect actually led the profit tax return that Eco Green N.V. intentionally made incorrectly and incompletely, so that the Court, again ruling, charged the suspect with the summons with the public prosecutor's office number 100.00464/14 under count 1 cumulative / alternative charged must acquit.
Counsel has pleaded that the suspect will be acquitted of the offense stated on the summons with public prosecutor's office number 100.0464/14 under count 1
cumulative/alternative test, because primarily it cannot be proven that Eco Green N.V. acted culpably, in the alternative because it cannot be proven that the suspect actually led the alleged criminal conduct of Eco Green N.V.
Annulment of the judgment of the Court of First Instance
The judgment of the Court of First Instance, in so far as it is subject to the judgment of the Court of Justice, cannot stand because the Court of Justice arrives at a different decision.
Parquet numbers: 100.00464/14 and 100.00464/14 (II)
3
Acquittal of public prosecutor's office number 100.00464/14 offense 1firstly cumulative/alternative
The Court agrees with the Attorney General and the defense that there is insufficient legal and convincing evidence for the cumulative/alternative indictment in the summons with public prosecutor number 100.00464/14 under count 1 in the first place. The conclusion cannot be drawn from the file that the suspect actually led the deliberately incorrect and incomplete filing of the 2009 income tax return by Eco Green N.V. cumulatively/alternatively charged, the question raised by counsel as to whether Eco Green N.V. acted culpably no longer needs an answer.
DECISION
The court: annuls the judgment of the General Court in so far as it is subject to the judgment of the Court of Justice and restores justice to that extent;
declares that what has been charged against the suspect in the summons with prosecutor's office number 100.00464/14 under count 1 first cumulatively / alternatively has not been proven and acquits him of this.
This judgment was rendered by Mrs. W.J. Geurts-de Veld, S. Verheijen, and R.L.M. van Opstal, members of the Court, assisted by L.M. Sinon, court clerk, and pronounced on 30 May 2022 in the presence of the court clerk in open court at the Court of Appeal in Sint Maarten.
Click here for the Dutch verdict handed down by the Appeals Court.
