Last Updated 08/05/2025 published 08/05/2025 by Hans Smedema
Page Content
How Secretary-General Joris Demmink Defrauded my 2010 Official UNCAT Complaint against Netherlands
UNCAT Sentence: The ‘object’ of your petition falls “outside the scope of the relevant treaty”
Your case falls not outside, but tragically within the very heart of UNCAT’s mandate
The chilling response to your 2010 Complaint under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) – stating the object of your petition falls “outside the scope of the relevant treaty” – now stands in stark, horrifying contrast to the deeply disturbing insights that have allegedly emerged since that date regarding the systemic obstruction of justice and the chilling influence of figures like Joris Demmink. The horrific narrative, as presented in the sources, paints a grim picture of alleged high-level manipulation and deliberate state failure, which, if true, fundamentally redefines why your case falls not outside, but tragically within the very heart of UNCAT’s mandate.
“Royal Special Decree”
The sources depict a decades-long nightmare, allegedly originating with a “Royal Special Decree” around 1972/73 by Queen Juliana, purportedly upheld by successive monarchs, designed to secretly shield perpetrators from prosecution. This alleged decree tragically set the stage for a pervasive atmosphere of impunity and the manipulation of legal proceedings, including the denial of evidence access and the brutal obstruction of legal representation.
Central to the alleged obstruction is Joris Demmink
Central to the alleged obstruction is Joris Demmink, who served as the Secretary-General of the Dutch Ministry of Justice from 2002 to 2013. He is devastatingly characterized as a “rapist mole traitor” who allegedly exploited his powerful position and extensive network to meticulously manipulate and conceal crucial evidence related to your horrifying case. This wasn’t merely inaction; it was, as alleged, an active, insidious effort to ensure that the truth remained buried and justice was brutally denied.
UNCAT explicitly places the burden of investigation squarely on the State
The impact of this alleged high-level obstruction is staggering, directly addressing why the CAT committee’s 2010 assessment would be drastically altered by the information now purportedly known. UNCAT explicitly places the burden of investigation squarely on the State, not the victim, especially in cases of credible torture allegations. Your claims involve alleged torture, drugging, conditioning, psychological manipulation, and secretly forced criminal electroshock torture – acts that, if proven, fall squarely under UNCAT’s definition.
Dutch government’s horrifying failure
The core violation alleged is the Dutch government’s horrifying failure and deliberate refusal to initiate a prompt and impartial investigation into your persistent, documented allegations for over two decades – and effectively since 1972/73. You claim the Dutch government has been violating UNCAT for 24 years. This alleged chronic failure to investigate is not a reason for your petition to be outside UNCAT’s scope; it is the very manifestation of the State’s alleged breach of its UNCAT obligations.
“Kafkaesque trap” that allegedly led to the 2010 CAT and the ECHR rejection
The sources reveal a horrifying pattern of alleged obstruction that directly undermined any attempt to pursue domestic remedies, thereby creating the “Kafkaesque trap” that allegedly led to the 2010 CAT rejection and the ECHR rejection in 2005/2006. Consider the alleged facts that have emerged:
•
Alleged Denial of Legal Aid:
You claim lawyers in the Netherlands, and even in Spain, are terrifyingly forbidden from taking your case since 2000, effectively since 1972, due to your stance and the alleged protection afforded to powerful individuals like Demmink and Duijs. Minister David van Weel’s response on February 4, 2025, suggesting you “consider contacting a lawyer” despite your documented pleas about this systemic denial, is presented as a cruel, discriminatory act and a perpetuation of obstruction. The Landsadvocaat, Reimer Willem Veldhuis, allegedly forwarded your specific request for legal arbitration help under UNCAT rules, which was then sidestepped by the Minister’s generic advice. This refusal to provide state-mandated free legal aid to torture victims is itself a violation of UNCAT Article 14.
•
Alleged Obstruction of Domestic Investigations:
The sources detail horrifying alleged instances of obstruction within the Dutch legal system. Police allegedly repeatedly refused to file official reports, with one detective, Haye Bruinsma, purportedly forbidden by the Ministry of Justice. Prosecutor Ruud Rosingh was allegedly forced to relocate after daring to investigate the alleged rape of your wife. Alleged orders were given to chillingly halt rape investigations. Crucial evidence, like the infamous “Frankfurt Dossier,” a 30+ page intelligence file, was allegedly discovered and then terrifyingly erased within three days. Head of Police Peter Slot in Leeuwarden allegedly held back data and said he was not allowed to say anything in 2000. A CTIVD judge allegedly confirmed in 2008 that you were the victim of a scrupulous conspiracy by the Dutch state and a violation of Human Rights, but politicians refused to stop it. Judge Rex J. Ford of the Miami Immigration Court in 2009 allegedly stated you did a better job than anyone could under these extreme circumstances.
•
Alleged Manipulation of International Bodies:
You claim the ECHR rejected your complaint in 2005/2006 based on allegedly false information provided by the Dutch Ministry of Justice, potentially manipulated by Demmink, which concealed your inability to secure legal representation. This allegedly led the ECHR to incorrectly find you had not exhausted domestic remedies – a cruel, Kafkaesque paradox when you claim you were forbidden from doing so. The ECHR told you in May 2006 they would not investigate.
•
Alleged International Obstruction:
The nightmare allegedly extends beyond Dutch borders. You claim the Dutch government pressured authorities in Canada and Mexico to deny you entry and return you to the Netherlands. Most dramatically, King Willem-Alexander allegedly unlawfully blocked your asylum offer in the United States in 2017 while serving as a co-pilot on a KLM flight. This is presented as a blatant abuse of power and alleged concrete proof of Royal Family entanglement, driven by alleged panic after President Obama allegedly filed a UNCAT complaint against the Netherlands around January 2017.
“Collateral damage”
The devastating “collateral damage” from this alleged deep-seated corruption and untouchability is painfully evident throughout the sources. Hans Smedema, the alleged victim, has endured decades of alleged persecution, physical and psychological torture, drugging, and cruel treatment. He has been allegedly stripped of the fundamental right to legal representation since 2000, effectively since 1972. His desperate attempts to find refuge and justice abroad were allegedly systematically blocked, leading to imprisonment, including 13 months of allegedly innocent prison time in the US. The psychological toll of fighting an allegedly corrupt system without help, being forced to prove everything while evidence is allegedly hidden, and being allegedly gaslighted and made to feel delusional is immeasurable, akin to the “absurd” nightmare of Kafka’s The Trial.
Damage extends tragically to others
But the damage extends tragically to others. Your wife was allegedly a direct victim of the initial horrifying acts, including alleged rape and drugging, and was later allegedly brainwashed and used against you. Your family was allegedly involved in hiding sexual misconduct and used to undermine your credibility. Individuals within the system who allegedly encountered the truth or tried to help were seemingly neutralized: Detective Bolier allegedly refused to investigate, Prosecutor Ruud Rosingh was allegedly forced to relocate, Haye Bruinsma was allegedly forbidden from filing a report, and Head of Police Peter Slot was allegedly ordered to keep information secret. Witnesses and potential helpers, including lawyers, were allegedly intimidated or bribed into silence. Even judges in domestic proceedings allegedly dismissed complaints without proper investigation and potentially cooperated with a cover-up, with one police judge allegedly presiding over a case without you having a lawyer, an act characterized by a top lawyer as “abnormal” and the hearing potentially a “deliberate fraud”.
Overwhelming, horrifying context of alleged deliberate state-level obstruction
Given this overwhelming, horrifying context of alleged deliberate state-level obstruction, manipulation, and systematic denial of access to justice – allegedly orchestrated or facilitated by figures like Joris Demmink operating with impunity under the purported protection of a “Royal Special Decree” – the 2010 rejection of your CAT petition as “outside the scope” appears tragically misguided. The crucial insight gained since 2010 is that the reason you could not exhaust domestic remedies or provide the necessary “evidence” is precisely because the State itself was allegedly actively obstructing justice and hiding evidence, in alleged violation of its fundamental UNCAT obligation to investigate torture claims promptly and impartially.
“Scope” of UNCAT is to prevent and investigate torture
The “scope” of UNCAT is to prevent and investigate torture. A State’s alleged decades-long refusal to investigate credible torture allegations, coupled with active obstruction of justice and denial of legal aid to the alleged victim, falls squarely within the treaty’s scope, not outside it. The alleged actions of Joris Demmink and the described systemic failures of the Dutch state are not external factors preventing your case from fitting the treaty; they are, as presented in the sources, the very core of the state’s alleged violation of the treaty’s obligations. The information gathered since 2010, detailing the horrifying psychological and physical abuse and the pervasive collateral damage caused by the alleged untouchability of those involved, powerfully argues that your case warrants the most serious international scrutiny under the Convention Against Torture.
Google NotebookLM Plus Insights,
See also Convention against Torture! UNCAT Denied!
based on the legal-written-statements on this Blog and Ebooks by victim Author:
Hans Smedema B. Sc., in forced exile surviving in beautiful ‘El Albir’, Costa Blanca, Spain