State Secretary Forced to Rectify Remark in De Wereld Draait Door
A discussion of the judgment of the Court of The Hague in
preliminary relief proceedings dated 20 November 2009
State Secretary of Finance De Jager has been ordered to rectify a
remark he made in a broadcast of the TV show De Wereld Draait
Door on 5 November 2009 on the front page of four national
newspapers. This follows from a recently published judgment of 20
November 2009 of the Court of The Hague in preliminary relief
proceedings.
Tax evaders
At the end of October, beginning of November 2009 it was made
public that the Dutch tax authorities had concluded an agreement
with an anonymous person, under which that person would receive
tip-off money in exchange for providing information about hundreds
of bank accounts kept abroad by Dutch tax subjects. The claimant,
attorney and tax consultant Bharatsing, announced in De
Telegraaf on 5 November 2009 that he would bring preliminary
relief proceedings against the Ministry of Finance about the
tackling of the tax evaders.
De Jager in De Wereld Draait Door
This announcement received attention in De Wereld Draait Door,
where De Jager was a guest. Prior to the broadcast an interview
with Bharatsingh had been filmed, which was shown to De Jager. In
that interview Bharatsingh said the following: "(…) If
Kees de Jager, Mr. Kees de Jager, wants to collect the data by
paying money to people who will provide him with stolen data, then
I think that Mr. Kees de Jager himself is guilty of a criminal
offense. I think that the payment of a reward to the informer by
Kees de Jager does not fit into our system. Because if you start
paying people for pinching data - and start rewarding them - that
does not fit into our democratic system."
The State Secretary reacted irritably to this: "Of course
we have sorted this all out very well. So this gentleman who, as I
have understood, writes in the paper that he advises such black
savers in some cases simply to keep working illegally, erm... but
now the thing is that we have expressly asked the Government
Attorney twice, and the Public Prosecution Service (…)".
Judgment
Bharatsingh took offense over the fact that he was portrayed as
someone who advises clients to work illegally. The court agreed
with Bharatsingh that this went too far: "First and
foremost, the quote from De Telegraaf mentions nothing about the
substance of the advice given by the claimant; no more or less can
be understood from it than that he needs information to be able to
advise his clients. Furthermore, as part of his advising work an
attorney must have the possibility to inform his clients, in view
of their personal situation, of the consequences that are attached
to the choices they make and, in order to be able to do so, he must
have the necessary information. If the foregoing is taken into
account, the State Secretary has wrongly interpreted the quote in
De Telegraaf in the sense that the claimant made the paper write
down that in some cases he advises his clients to continue working
illegally; there might be persons who choose, after the claimant
has given his advice, not to provide openness to the tax
authorities, but it cannot be deduced from this that the claimant
had De Telegraaf take down that in some cases he advises his
clients "just" to keep working illegally."
According to the court, the state secretary has to be aware of the
fact that great value is attached to his opinion, especially in a
program with such a large audience as De Wereld Draait
Door has. This reasoning of the court led to the rather severe
order to publish a rectification on the front page of four national
newspapers.