What you need to know about the actions of the police and the government in the Netherlands on the example of the case of Mark Sokolovsky, who is considered by the media as "the best hacker of all times and peoples"

Apr 19, 2024, 12:19:11 PM

Mark Sokolovsky spent two years in a Dutch prison awaiting extradition. Journalists, as observers, followed Mark's case and conducted their own investigation. Using Mark Sokolovsky's case as an example, we tested the Dutch legal system. Today, with direct evidence, we want to confidently declare to the whole world that the Dutch legal system has failed the test. The purpose of this article, which we bring to the attention of our readers, is to make sure that by the example of Mark Sokolovsky's story other people and first of all our compatriots - Ukrainians - do not suffer from the actions of the police, minister of justice, prosecutor as it happened to Mark Sokolovsky and his companion. So that other people do not fall into a trap from which it is impossible to get out of in the Netherlands. It's hard to believe, but we have come across documents that show how the Dutch police essentially assaulted a person, illegally seized things, and yet behaved convincingly, later claiming that they had not broken the law. The Ministry of Justice, the prosecutor's office also saw no violations in the actions of the police, but it is difficult for us to agree. After two years Mark's injured companion from the police actions, together with Mark Sokolovsky's mother is trying to find justice, but as it turns out, in the Netherlands it is impossible to achieve justice, if we are talking about the Dutch government, the system works only in one direction, as they say - the ball in one gate!

Now it's all in order:

On March 20, 2022, Mark Sokolovskyi was arrested when leaving the Room Mate Aitana hotel in the Netherlands, as it later became known, "at the request of the United States".  Mark did not hide, did not run away, and even more so did not expect any detention - he was legally staying on the territory of the Netherlands and did not commit any unlawful acts. On the way to the parking lot, when Mark was walking to the parking lot, four police officers behaved improperly: they approached Mark from behind, pushed him in the back with great force, Mark hit his head against the wall, not understanding what was happening. No explanation of the reason for the detention, no documents were shown to the police. They attacked him, twisted him, handcuffed him, tightened them tightly, pointed a gun, pushed him into a car and drove him away.

Further events make it even more clear that in the Netherlands police officers can act outside the law without being held accountable. We are talking about Mark Sokolovsky's companion, who was not near him at the time of his arrest and was far away from him. She has nothing to do with the crime in which Mark is suspected, and even less to do with extradition. The girl was checking out of her hotel room, the security guard who had helped her carry her luggage put her suitcases at the front desk.  The girl took the elevator downstairs and exited the elevator without her suitcases, she had only a lady's purse with her. It was at this moment that she was attacked by four men in civilian clothes in front of the visitors and hotel staff, humiliating her honor and dignity.

 Quote from the complaint addressed to Justice Minister Dilan Yesilgoz-Zegerius:

"On March 20, 2022, at 12:40 p.m. in the lobby of the Room Mate Aitana hotel located at IJdok 6, in Amsterdam, I was approached by a group of four people in civilian clothes, two women and two men. They did not provide me with any identification where I could see and read their names, surnames and positions. One of the women, Ms. J. E. Vlotman (whose name I learned later, after a visit to the police department, where I learned that the woman's name was Ms. J. E. Vlotman) quickly showed something in front of my face, but being about one meter away, I could not see what the document was or what it said. I am a citizen of a foreign country, and the people who attacked me knew this, but still ignored it. They did not provide me with a sworn interpreter and did not offer to call the Ukrainian consul. The procedure of my detention was not properly followed and, moreover, my right to defense was violated. One of the men of this group forcibly took my unlocked phone out of my hands and without my consent penetrated into my personal data (thus violating the secrecy of my correspondence and communication), thus committing unlawful acts provided for by para. 1, Art. 300, Chapter XX of the Criminal Code of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and 1, Art. 13, Chapter I of the Constitution of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The woman, Ms. J. E. Vlotman, pushed my hand away with force and got into my handbag without my consent, she independently took some items out of my handbag, thereby committing unlawful acts under Art. 1, Art. 300, Chapter XX of the Criminal Code of the Kingdom of the Netherlands".

And that was just the beginning of the attack on Mark's companion. She was not provided with a document confirming the legal grounds for the search in her purse and the seizure of her passport in the name of Mark Sokolovsky and car keys. She was also not provided with a protocol of the seizure of things from her purse, which should specify: what authority seized the things, who seized the things, who is responsible for the things, where the seized things will be kept. The protocol was not formalized according to the procedural procedure and handed over properly. The girl was of course confused, in a foreign country, without language skills and support, she was very stressed. Her phone was forcibly taken away from her when she took it out of her purse to use Google translator, at the moment when she unlocked it one of the attacking men snatched the phone from her hands and ran away behind a pillar in the hotel lobby. When she asked for her phone back, she was told to go buy a new one. After much persuasion through an interpreter from the phone of one of the attacking women, the phone was returned to Mark's companion after it had been examined and the information seized. And then events developed even more interestingly, with more violations, infringement of human rights and the realization on the part of the police that it would all go unpunished for them.

The following is a quote from the complaint against Dilan Yesilgoz-Zegerius:

"My luggage that was at the reception the police officers moved it to another area of the hotel on their own. I did not see them moving my suitcases. Jacqueline put me on notice that they were going to inspect my luggage without me. I asked many times to be allowed to be present when my bags were searched, I was refused. I was given my phone back and left alone in the hotel lobby. Before the search of my luggage, I was not shown a court order or any other document that allowed these people to search my luggage. The purpose of the search without my presence and on what grounds was not explained to me either. When the search was completed, the police did not inform me. They left the luggage near the wall in the hotel lobby and left without informing me of the end of the procedure. After the police left I found my luggage on my own and saw that my things were missing, I regard this as a fact of theft and abuse of power by the officials. For the inspection there are procedural norms, which should be observed by police officers, in my case they were not observed, which violated my rights: I was not allowed to inspect my luggage. The protocol of seizure where the detailed inventory was recorded (brand of equipment, number of equipment, scratches on the equipment, color, quantity), was not procedurally formalized and handed over to me. The money was not counted in my presence, the list of bills was not prescribed, the amount of money was not fixed in my presence. The money and things were not packed separately from each other, were not fixed with a seal. All procedural norms of the law were violated. In accordance with paragraph 3 of Art. 94 of the CPC of the Netherlands from 15.01.1921 valid from 01.03.2023, to date, the officer conducting the search, must draw up a report on the seizure of items, even in cases where the powers of seizure is vested in the investigating judge or state prosecutor. To the extent possible, the person from whom the items were seized should be given a certificate of receipt."

It turns out that the policewoman Jacqueline deliberately deceived Mark's companion, she said that they would only inspect the luggage, but from the luggage disappeared valuables and money, which is equal to theft, or from theft is no different, as the owner of the things to the inspection was not allowed, and was not notified that the things will be seized. The following is a quote from the complaint:

"The actions of the police officers had a negative impact on my condition, which put me out of balance and I could not defend myself at that moment. Not knowing the legal laws of your country, I wrote a complaint to the Prime Minister Marko Ryuta and received a reply and recommendations (the reply is attached). I also wrote a complaint to the Ombudsman (response attached), I wrote a complaint to the special police department for complaints against the police (response attached). I asked for help from local lawyers. The lawyers verbally agreed that the Dutch police violated my rights, exceeded their authority, and that the seizure of my belongings was not legal. But they refused to help me, citing that they did not want to quarrel with the police. The lawyer Siko Wester instead of filing a complaint filed a petition for the return of things, convincing me that the things will be returned to me. By the court's decision, I was only given back a pair of AirPods and a document for the car".

The conclusions after studying the complaints are self-evident: - Before the luggage search, Mark Sokolovsky's girlfriend was not shown any court warrant or other document that would have allowed these people to search her luggage. She was also left in the dark as to the purpose of such a search without her presence, and on what legal basis it was not explained to her. In addition, after the search was over, these people did not warn about their departure and that they had taken things and money, which can indeed be considered as theft. Such actions of the police cannot be qualified as theft - there was no protocol of search, seizure, no record of the amount of money seized, no bill numbers, not a single document was not provided, and nowhere she did not put her signature! In the numerous complaints filed by the victim of the police actions, she stated the following: the theft of belongings and money had taken place, and not by anyone, but by the Dutch police. In fact, the girl was assaulted, her personal belongings were stolen and she had nothing to do with the extradition of Mark Sokolovsky. Complaints about the theft of belongings and money were sent to all authorities, including the Ministry of Justice, and to the Prime Minister of the Netherlands Mark Rutte. In addition to stating the fact of the disappearance, the girl asked to inform where the illegally seized things and money were and to return them. In response - shifting the blame and responsibility from one authority to another. For two years the victim has been going around in circles in an attempt to find answers to her questions and return her belongings and money. Until today, the victim has never received any documents that her belongings were taken from her, she still does not know where they are, how they were stored and when they were seized and on the basis of what documents. Quote from the complaint to Dilan Yesilgoz-Zegerius:

 "Until today, I have not been informed where my belongings are, how they are packed, what number of banknotes of monetary signs were taken from my bags in my absence? What guarantees of storage of my belongings, money, in what condition the equipment, and what guarantees that the gadgets are not infected with a virus by third parties. I have no trust in the police of the Netherlands"

Further actions of representatives of law enforcement agencies simply lead to shock and do not fit in the head: the Netherlands is a state of law, where the laws must be observed, but in this case it did not happen: We have not found a petition of the investigator for the arrest of things and money that were seized from the victim on March 20, 2022. But there is a document that states that the money was mistakenly not seized, this document is dated June 2022. That is, the money was taken away on March 20, 2022, and the arrest was made in June 2022. The question is where was the money from March to June, who used it, why the documents were not executed in accordance with the law?

Another important detail in this case, falsification of documents. The things that belonged to his companion and were taken away from her are written down in the protocol as things that belonged to Mark Sokolovsky and that they were seized from Mark Sokolovsky, which is completely untrue: at the time of his arrest, Mark did not have any things except his phone and documents. But it was favorable for the Dutch police to do so, and for the government to hide the falsification of documents. There was no request for Mark's companion, so the Dutch police had no legal grounds to attack her and take away her belongings, but breaking the law they did it, and further breaking the law they wrote in the police report that the belongings were taken from Mark Sokolovsky. Mark Sokolovsky also wrote requests to be given an explanation for the illegal actions of the police, but we will talk about that in the next article.

We believe that there is a crime, which the victim was unable to prove, and which remains under investigation by journalists. Mark Sokolovsky's companion came to the Netherlands from Ukraine and traveled during the war actually from under fire. The girl was able to take with her the most necessary things: personal belongings, gadgets and money. In the Netherlands, she immediately came under the protection of the state and immediately suffered illegally. In the case of Mark Sokolovsky himself, there are also many questions and no answers. We appeal in this article to journalists, legal experts, public figures: help to restore justice and give a chance to those who find themselves in a similar situation to believe that the truth will always find its way.

Кількість коментів у цієї статті: 0

Залишити коментар

Вашу адресу електронної пошти не буде опубліковано.