Ghent Attorney General Erwin Dernicourt has responded to the allegations of lawyer Walter Van Steenbrugge. Van Steenbrugge was mentioned in a drug case at the end of this week. He is accused of participating in a criminal organization. Van Steenbrugge suspects revenge by First Advocate General Francis Clarysse, but his superior vehemently denies. “This request for referral was not drafted by First Solicitor General Francis Clarysse and he in no way made the decision to do so.”
The investigation revolves around a drug lab in Lendelede and the production of a large amount of amphetamines. The leaders eventually turned out to be a man from Ostend and a Dutchman. The court wants to prosecute a total of 25 people in the case, including lawyer Walter Van Steenbrugge.
The court was able to seize a telephone conversation between Van Steenbrugge and his client. This would show that the criminal lawyer had gone beyond his means, since Van Steenbrugge would have advised his client to go to the flat of his son – who was also suspected – and to have mobile phones, computers and laptops disappear. The top lawyer would also have been part of the criminal organization himself, which is why he was placed under suspicion.
revenge action
Van Steenbrugge responded that this was an act of revenge by the first advocate general at the Court of Appeal in Ghent, Francis Clarysse. According to Van Steenbrugge, Clarysse could not have tolerated the fact that the euthanasia process came to an acquittal in 2020 for Van Steenbrugge’s client. According to Van Steenbrugge, the summons in the drug file is therefore an act of revenge by the attorney general in question.
But Attorney General Erwin Dernicourt and Superior of Clarysse is formal: “In the judicial investigation conducted by the investigating judge in Bruges and currently fixed for trial before the council chamber in Bruges, there is no question of any retaliatory action by the Public Prosecution Service against anyone. and for whatever reason,” it sounds.
Quote
In this file about an extensive drug crime, the Public Prosecution Service believes it should request the referral to the criminal court of 25 persons, including two lawyers.
“Legal Duty”
“After a judicial investigation, it is the legal duty of the Public Prosecution Service to let the chambers decide on the objections with regard to the persons involved. A judge assesses those objections after hearing the Public Prosecution Service and the defence. In this file about an extensive drug crime, the Public Prosecution Service believes it should request the referral to the criminal court of 25 people, including two lawyers,” said Attorney General Dernicourt.
“This request for referral was not drafted by First Solicitor General Francis Clarysse and he in no way made the decision to do so.” The Attorney General therefore hopes that the debates before the council chamber can still be conducted with the necessary serenity.
Walter Van Steenbrugge in court? How the feud between him and Attorney General Francis Clarysse started (+)
Top lawyer Walter Van Steenbrugge named in drug case, but emphatically denies: “Pure revenge action by the prosecutor against me” (+)
Free unlimited access to Showbytes? Which can!
Log in or create an account and don’t miss out on any of the stars.