Hard attack by CDA MP Knops in lawsuit against journalist from NRC

He did it not only for himself, said Member of Parliament (and former minister and state secretary) Raymond Knops, but on behalf of all those other hard-working administrators and politicians who are affected by fake news.

CDA member Knops was at the Amsterdam court on Thursday, where he had filed a case against NRC and The Limburger† Investigations by these newspapers in 2020 revealed that when he bought a building plot in 2010 through a complex scheme, he was ‘advanced by tens of thousands of euros’ over others using the same scheme.

It is rare for a former minister to take the media to court, but Knops says he had no choice. The damage to his reputation from the publications, and the “indiscriminate takeover by magazines and social media”, was too great to ignore. His concerns about reputational damage did not stop Knops from making accusations in an increasingly harsh tone against NRC journalist Joep Dohmen, one of the two authors of the publications. It was “malicious,” wrote with a “poison pen as a weapon,” with the “evident intent to win prizes” and force politicians to resign. “Undermining for the rule of law,” said Knops.

He, Knops, now stood up for the victims of “the gang of Dohmen”, a journalist who, according to the MP, fits into the category of international fraudsters such as Bernie Madoff, Diederik Stapel and The Wolf of Wall Street Jordan Belfort.

“Knops’ comments are an unprecedentedly far-reaching attack on us as a journalistic organization,” says NRC editor-in-chief René Moerland. “Assembling criminal or psychiatric motives, accusing them of undermining the rule of law without any substantiation is an unacceptable attack on our journalist, who is simply doing his job, and doing it right.”

Knops’ accusations were sidetracked during the hearing, which revolved around the analysis and conclusions that NRC and De Limburger drew after investigation about the circumstances surrounding Knops’ land purchase.

Room-for-room

The purchase was made through the so-called room-by-room arrangement. This allowed private individuals to convert agricultural land into residential land through a company of the province of Limburg. While others generally bought 1,000 square meters of land for residential purposes, Knops bought a residential plot from the provincial space company that, according to the notarial deed, was 750 square meters in size, but when measured by the Land Registry, it turned out to be 1,175 square meters. In the end, the municipality even allocated 1,500 square meters of residential use.

Also read: Civil servants helped State Secretary Knops with private matters

According to Knops’ lawyer Josine van den Berg, the ‘unlucky’ cadastral registration yielded nothing: after all, Knops only needed 750 square meters for the house he wanted to build, and according to her, rules make building on the rest impossible.

Long gable houses

The difference between the 1,500 square meters of residential zoning allocated and the 750 purchased square meters of residential zoning provided Knops with an undeniable financial advantage, argued lawyer Jens van den Brink on behalf of NRC and De Limburger. Anyone who claims that a residential destination is worth no more than agricultural land “cannot be taken seriously”.

A later publication revealed that the house that Knops wanted to build on the ground was larger than allowed by municipal rules. Despite a negative official advice, aldermen decided to delete internal rules to make the larger home possible. More than a year after Knops was able to build his home in this way, this option was formally included in municipal policy. But there was no question of personal advantage here either, in the opinion of Knops. “The municipality was anticipating a new policy to bring long-walled houses back into the area.”

Knops wants the judge to declare that the “accusations of favoritism” are unlawful. Newspapers and journalists must also be banned from making the allegations “regardless of how the accusation is formulated and regardless of where the accusation is made.” Judgment expected on June 29.

ttn-32