It is a unique step. Most suspects are happy if they only get a warning from the police or the Public Prosecution Service and they do not have to appear before a judge. But Wendy Struijk from Someren does not accept the warning she received because of defamation. She filed a so -called Article 12 procedure. And wants to drag himself to court.
In 2023 a police car will stop at the Wendy Struijk house. “Two agents got out and I received an invitation to come to the desk,” she says. “That had quite an impact, because my children were at home.”
Earlier that year, Struijk and eight other residents accused the mayor of Someren of criminal offenses. The expressions were made in a door-to-door magazine and on social media and, according to the mayor, could not get through. The OM set an investigation.
Read also
“I would have liked to explain it later.”
At the end of last year she received a letter from the Public Prosecution Service. After investigation, he concluded that there was libel. But a corridor to court didn’t have to be done. The officer kept it with a warning.
“I could never defend myself.”
Most people might breathe relieved. But Struijk is not satisfied with it. And so she takes a very unusual step. She makes an article 12 procedure. She asks the Court of Appeal to bring the case to court. Most of the time victims do this when they are angry because the judiciary does not continue a case. Rarely ‘perpetrators’ such as Struijk.
But she wants to have her name purified. “I have never been able to defend myself,” she says angry. “The OM had invited us to come to the office. But we couldn’t do that date. We thought a new date would be punctured and then suddenly the letter came that the case had been dismissed. “
“I am convinced that I will come out well.”
But for Struijk it is anything but finished. She has her own company in accountancy and tax advice. Clearing her name is important for the VOG, the declaration of behavior she may need for her work. She thinks she was not guilty of defamation and wants the judge to look at it.
The article 12 procedure will not be an easy process for Wendy Struijk. If she loses, she will not get the costs back. And perhaps the punishment is more difficult. “But I am convinced that I will come out well,” she says. “And the money is no longer about the money, it is about the principle. This case is so highlighted in the media. I want to have my name purified. “
“It was decided to leave it with an extensive letter.”
The Public Prosecution Service says in a response that all suspects in the interrogation have extensively had the opportunity to respond to the suspicions. “Several suspects have also had a personal conversation with the public prosecutor, in which we have explained the motivation that is also stated in the letter,” writes the OM in a written response.
“That is not common, but we thought that was appropriate, given the nature of the case. For a variety of reasons, it was not possible in all cases to come to such a conversation within a reasonable period of time. In those cases we have chosen to leave it in the extensive letter, as happens in most cases. “