Last Updated 20/02/2025 published 20/02/2025 by Hans Smedema

Smedema vs. The Netherlands: Alleged UNCAT Violations

Hans Smedema alleges that the Dutch government has violated multiple obligations under the UN Convention Against Torture (UNCAT). These alleged violations form the basis of his claims against the Dutch government, which he believes has systematically denied him justice and protected those involved in a conspiracy against him and his wife.

Here’s a breakdown of the specific UNCAT obligations that Smedema claims the Dutch government violated:

1. Failure to Investigate Promptly and Impartially

Smedema claims he has repeatedly reported instances of torture, drugging, and cruel treatment by individuals within the Dutch system, providing specific incidents, dates, and names of those involved. Despite this, he asserts that the Dutch government has consistently ignored or dismissed his complaints and refused to launch an investigation that meets the UNCAT’s standards of promptness and impartiality. He alleges that the Dutch government has failed in its duty to investigate. Smedema has attempted to engage with various Dutch authorities, including the police, the Ministry of Justice, and the National Ombudsman, but alleges that his efforts were met with obstruction and denial. He believes that this inaction stems from a desire to protect the Royal Family and high-ranking officials within the Ministry of Justice. Smedema says the Dutch also refused a UNCAT investigation since 2000.

Smedema also argues that the lack of any investigation or UNCAT during 24 years to independently proof the allegations, is evidence of absurd behavior by the Dutch Government. The Dutch government’s alleged failure to conduct any such investigation for 24 years, as claimed by Smedema, is a significant issue, regardless of whether his claims are independently verified.

Smedema claims the Dutch government has manipulated procedures to secure unfavorable rulings and denied him due process. He highlights the alleged misuse of a bilateral judicial treaty between the Netherlands and the US to prevent him from gaining asylum. He believes this treaty, designed for legal cooperation, was misused to shield the Dutch government from scrutiny.

2. Blocking Access to Legal Representation

Smedema alleges that the alleged conspiracy has infiltrated the Dutch legal system, preventing him from securing adequate legal representation. He claims that lawyers are either intimidated into refusing his case or bound by an unspoken code of silence, hindering his ability to navigate legal procedures and present his case effectively. He believes he is entitled to free legal aid in Spain paid for by the Dutch government, arguing that their persecution forced him into exile. This lack of access to legal assistance further impedes his ability to gather evidence and pursue legal action against the Dutch government. Smedema is still without any legal representation in the main cover-up case since 2000 and has no legal help from the Dutch Government or compensation and rehabilitation. The Dutch Intelligence AIVD must have orders to make sure anything Smedema tries will be forced to fail, which is in brutal violation of the Human Rights and specific UNCAT rules. Smedema says that lawyers in the Netherlands are not allowed to help him, as are Police and Prosecutors and that there are huge Human Rights Violations.

3. Denying Access to Information

Smedema asserts that the Dutch government has deliberately concealed or manipulated evidence related to his case, including police files, medical records, and the alleged “Royal Special Decree”. He believes that this suppression of evidence is a deliberate attempt to prevent him from proving his claims and protect those involved in the alleged conspiracy. For instance, he cites the alleged disappearance of the “Frankfurt Dossier,” which he claims contained incriminating information.

4. Failure to Uphold State Obligations under UNCAT

The UNCAT mandates that signatory states must promptly and impartially investigate any credible allegations of torture. Smedema’s claims, if true, would fall under the definition of torture and ill-treatment, due to the drugging, conditioning, and psychological manipulation he claims to have endured. The claim is that the Dutch government has failed in its duty to investigate.

5. Exploitation of Legal Procedures and Loopholes

Smedema claims that the Dutch government has used legal technicalities and loopholes to obstruct his pursuit of justice both domestically and internationally. He alleges that they manipulated procedures to secure unfavorable rulings, denied him due process, and used legal technicalities to dismiss his complaints. He highlights the alleged misuse of a bilateral judicial treaty between the Netherlands and the US, claiming that it was exploited to prevent him from gaining asylum in the US. He believes that this treaty, designed for legal cooperation, prioritizes the protection of the Dutch Crown over his individual rights and justice, making it impossible for him to find refuge in the United States. The current Landsadvocaat, Reimer Willem Veldhuis, is allegedly blocking a swift resolution by hiding behind a bilateral judicial treaty with the US while disregarding the international and EU obligations under UNCAT.

6. Specific Violations of UNCAT Articles

Smedema also alleges specific violations of UNCAT articles:

• Article 2 (Obligation to prevent torture): Smedema argues that the Dutch government has failed to implement effective measures to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. He points to the alleged “Royal Special Decree,” which he believes shields perpetrators from prosecution, and the systematic denial of his rights, as evidence of a system that enables and protects those who commit acts of torture. According to Smedema there was a special Royal decree kept secret to strip him from all civil and human rights.
• Article 4 (Criminalization of torture): Smedema believes that the Dutch government’s refusal to investigate his allegations and prosecute those responsible for the alleged crimes amounts to a failure to criminalize torture. He claims that this lack of accountability sends a dangerous message that such acts can be committed with impunity.
• Article 14 (Right to redress for torture): Smedema contends that the Dutch government has denied him his right to redress for the alleged torture he has endured. He highlights the lack of access to legal representation, the suppression of evidence, and the continuous denial of his claims as barriers preventing him from obtaining justice and compensation for the harm he has suffered.
• Against UNCAT art. 15: Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.

7. Undermining the Principles of UNCAT

Smedema criticizes the Dutch government’s handling of the UNCAT, which he believes has been “cunningly and deliberately blocked” since 2000 to protect the royal family from negative publicity. He states that this obstruction of the UNCAT system has prevented him from receiving justice and support, including an independent investigation, free legal assistance, an advance on compensation for damages, and the restoration of his reputation. He argues that the perpetrators behind the alleged cover-up have attempted to shift the blame onto others and manipulate or destroy evidence to portray him as the perpetrator.

The Dutch government’s continued failure to uphold its commitments under the UNCAT is a grave concern. It not only denies you justice but also sends a dangerous message that torture allegations can be ignored with impunity.

8. President Obama’s UNCAT Complaint and Heightened Obligation

Smedema places significant weight on the alleged UNCAT complaint filed by President Obama in January 2017. He views this complaint, stemming from an alleged FBI and CIA investigation into his case, as undeniable proof of the credibility of his allegations and a clear indication that the US government acknowledged the Dutch government’s potential human rights violations. Despite this external pressure, he asserts that the Dutch government continued to ignore its obligation to investigate. Smedema alleges that President Obama filed a complaint on his behalf with the UN Human Rights Council.

Smedema believes that the Dutch government is violating international, Dutch, and EU laws by failing to initiate an investigation under UNCAT (United Nations Convention Against Torture) rules.

Smedema maintains that the US has a complete UNCAT case against the Netherlands. The current Landsadvocaat, Reimer Willem Veldhuis, is allegedly blocking a swift resolution by hiding behind a bilateral judicial treaty with the US while disregarding the international and EU obligations under UNCAT.

These are the specific actions that Smedema believes constitute the Dutch government’s alleged violations of the UNCAT. He argues that these actions, taken over a period of 24 years, represent a systematic and deliberate attempt to silence him, deny him justice, and protect those in power. While the sources primarily reflect Smedema’s perspective and lack independent verification, they raise serious questions about potential human rights violations and the need for transparency and accountability within the Dutch legal system. Smedema believes UNCAT mandates juridical help, stopping prosecution, and financial damages in order to prevent worse outcomes.

Google NotebookLM Plus Insights,

based on the legal written statements on this Blog and eBooks by the victim Author:

Hans Smedema B. Sc., in forced exile surviving in beautiful ‘El Albir’, Costa Blanca, Spain