Case Schild & Vrienden ready for introduction to criminal court almost 5 years after facts | Interior

The East Flanders public prosecutor’s office had launched a criminal investigation following a “Pano” report on September 5, 2018. It showed that racist and anti-Semitic messages were shared in secret chat groups of Schild & Vrienden. In June 2019, Dries Van Langenhove was officially charged. The Schild & Vrienden founder was released under conditions and had to, among other things, follow a guided visit to the Kazerne Dossin in Mechelen.

The Chamber’s plenary session lifted his parliamentary immunity in March 2021. Van Langenhove was not prosecuted by the council chamber for negationism, but he was referred to the criminal court for violations of racism legislation and weapons legislation. The exclusion order for negationism was appealed by two civil parties, and the Indictment Chamber (KI) ruled that he must nevertheless answer for negationism. Van Langenhove has since resigned from the Chamber.

Most of the other suspects requested that the prosecution not be prosecuted, because they believed that there were no criminal offences, but in addition, the suspension of the judgment was also requested from the council chamber. The council chamber pronounced the suspension for five suspects, so that they do not have to appear before the criminal court. Ultimately, Van Langenhove and six other suspects must answer to the criminal court. Ghent University, the Interfederal Equal Opportunities Center Unia, the League for Human Rights and the Institute for the equality of women and men, among others, have filed civil proceedings.

The case will be initiated on Tuesday and a conclusion calendar will be agreed so that the case can be pleaded after the judicial leave, but that is not certain in a file full of procedural issues. For example, investigating judge Annemie Serlippens withdrew after a challenge request from Van Langenhove and his lawyer Hans Rieder, who argued that Serlippens was biased. This was followed by a further application to the Court of Cassation for legal suspicion, because one of the civil parties in the case is a retired magistrate who was attached to the court of appeal in Ghent. Finally, a check of the regularity of the administration of justice was requested by the defense. The AI ​​ruled that an appearance of partiality had been created by the investigating judge, but that did not lead to the annulment of documents from the file.