Lawyers believe that judges renounce their duties in criminal cases with evidence from cryptotphones

A group of nearly a hundred lawyers believes that courts and courts do not perform their task properly in criminal cases that revolve around Endotphones from Encrochat and Sky. They complained about this in a letter to the Council for the Judiciary, a body that represents the interests of courts and courts.

According to the signatories, legal arguments regarding the legality of evidence from these cryptot telephones are “systematically” rejected and there is “unacceptable judgment formation.” According to the lawyers, this is contrary to the principle that every suspect is entitled to a fair trial.

The core of the legal debate is the principle of trust that revolves around the handling of evidence that has been obtained in other countries. Because the investigations into Encrochat and Sky have formally walked in France, issues about the legality and reliability of evidence must be tested in France according to the Public Prosecution Service.

French or Dutch research?

Dutch judges must trust that French judges do that in honor and conscience. Although Dutch investigative authorities have collaborated with the French in these studies, that in practice that evidence from Encrochat and Sky is accepted without being tested for legality and reliability in the Netherlands. After all, that was done in France.

In a judgment on this issue, the Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that the principle of trust could be put aside if it appears that cooperation between France and the Netherlands has been very intensive or if the Netherlands has taken the initiative for cooperation.

There is now a discussion about the latter following a French official report from the original investigation into Sky, which was recently introduced into a number of Dutch criminal cases. It states that the Dutch authorities have requested “to tap Sky’s servers.” According to the signatories of the letter, it can be deduced from that document that the Netherlands has actually taken the initiative to investigate Sky.

But a request for hearing the French detective who has drawn up this piece was rejected by the Court in Amsterdam. According to the Court, this request from the Netherlands to TAPAP’s servers not to tap that the Netherlands took the initiative for the investigation into Sky. And apparently the Court does not think that this text suggests that there is ‘intensive cooperation’.

Zoom in

This judgment of the Court of Appeal on the facts was almost literally taken over by judges in a number of other criminal cases. According to the signatories of the letter, that means that courts and courts renounce their task to “fully, independently and thoroughly investigate and judge” the facts in criminal cases.

And they find that unjustified, they conclude in the letter: “Every innocent suspected suspect has the right to a fair trial, even if that feels uncomfortable. It is precisely this that distinguishes and proves the rule of law.”

To share





Mail the editors