website: http://europeanjournalists.org •
Open letter to Mr Juncker:
Mr Jean-Claude Juncker
President of the European Commission
Rue de la Loi,
200 1049 Brussels
24 April 2015, Brussels
Dear President Juncker,
The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), together with its affiliate in Luxemburg, the Association of Luxembourgers Journalists (ALJ) are very alarmed by legal proceedings launched by the Luxemburg authority against the French investigative journalist Edward Perrin, who was among the journalists revealing the tax avoidance scandal “LuxLeaks”.
According to a statement issued by the prosecutors’ office on 23 April, the investigative judge charged a French journalist (who has been identified as Edward Perrin) accused of being a co-author, if not an accomplice in crimes committed by a former PwC employee.
We consider that the charges against Perrin are disproportionate and violate Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights which guarantee the right to freedom of expression and information.
We strongly believe that the public interest arguments in the “LuxLeaks” case are compelling. Following the revelation, it has led to heated public debates among citizens and policy makers about loopholes in taxation systems across the EU. The European Parliament has also set up a special committee on tax rulings. It is evident that the investigation and reporting of the “LuxLeaks” has been conducted in the public interest with the aim to inform the public that a small, privileged group of multinational corporations are given favourable tax regimes.
We would also like to draw your attention to the Council of Europe Recommendation on the Protection of Whistle-blowers on 30 April 2014: Individuals who report or disclose information on threats or harm to the public interest (“whistle-blowers”) should be given the protection because disclosing such information can contribute to strengthening transparency and democratic accountability.
Journalists have the right to protect their confidential sources. During investigations, they often rely whistle-blowers to provide information in order to reveal the wrong-doings of officials or unjust systems. The prosecution of whistle-blowers in the “LuxLeaks” would have a serious impact on investigative journalism.
With this letter, we call on you and the First Vice-President, Mr. Frans Timmermans, who is also in charge of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to take the necessary measures to ensure that Luxemburg respects the European Union laws on freedom of expression and information.
We would also like to remind you that on 30 July 2014, you have responded to a letter from us requesting for a meeting with you. We would very much appreciate to meet with you and your cabinet soon to discuss further this particular issue and our concerns.
Thank you and we are looking forward to meeting you soon.
CC: Mr. Frans Timmermans, First Vice-President of the European Commission, Commissioner Better Regulation, Inter-Institutional Relations, Rule of Law and Charter of Fundamental Rights Best regards
Ricardo Gutiérrez, EFJ General Secretary
Roger Infalt, ALJ President
Mogens Blicher Bjerregård, EFJ President
APRIL 2ND 2016 CORRUPTION CASE IN LUXEMBOURG. SOLIDARITY WITH ANTOINE DELTOUR AND EDOUARD PERRIN FROM THE LANDSBANKI VICTIMS OF FRAUD
A solidarity committee with Antoine Deltour and Edouard Perrin created in Luxembourg
Despite the holiday period, about thirty people gathered on Friday 1 April, during the noon hour, union casino in Luxembourg-Bonnevoie, to proceed with the formal establishment of a solidarity committee with Antoine Deltour and Edouard Perrin. An earlier call for the launch of such a committee had already gathered about twenty activists, human rights activists, journalists and lawyers. In addition to those who could be present, twenty other people from different sides and areas of activity, joined them to organize solidarity with Antoine Deltour and Edouard Perrin.
It was decided to maintain the call for the launch of the solidarity committee in Luxembourg as a base and platform. The committee’s goal is not to debate about taxes, a fairer taxation or the “rulings” that were the basis of the scandal “Luxleaks” but to organize solidarity with the two people whose courage allowed to publicly reveal the size of the tax evasion Luxembourg and, subsequently, in almost all countries of Europe (and beyond).
The revelations of Deltour and Perrin are the source of a wide movement control and containment of tax avoidance abuse of multinationals, leading discussions and special committee in the European Parliament, the G20 – a move that is not certainly not yet complete. The general interest of the revelations made by Antoine Deltour widely prevalent offenses (copies of hundreds of “tax rulings” – tax agreements concluded by the Luxembourg tax authorities on behalf of multinationals). The dissemination of this information by Edouard Perrin meets a right to information. Thus, the issue of solidarity with Antoine Deltour and Edouard Perrin at the trial which will start on April 26 aims first to penalize by imprisonment or fines those who launched even relayed the alert. But the challenge is also the right to information and protection of sources of the press.
As of now, the solidarity committee has scheduled three concrete actions:
1) The establishment of a website www.solidarite-deltour-perrin.lu (*), which each have the opportunity to sign the solidarity appeal with Antoine Deltour and Edouard Perrin. In addition, the site will inform about all actions of solidarity.
2) the evening of April 26, the day the trial began Deltour and Perrin, and already the day before, there will be a great evening of solidarity with showing testimonies and interventions and highlighting the usefulness of their brave and selfless action. – Details of this event will follow.
3) Before the trial opened on April 26, a rally will take place on the shelf of the Holy Spirit, not to put pressure on justice, but to publicly express solidarity with Antoine Deltour and Edouard Perrin.
The support committee will follow the trial and will continue to support and Antoine Edouard throughout the legal proceedings.
(*) The line-up of the site is scheduled for Saturday, April 2, 2016
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2834015/Hypocrite-s-bad-EU-s-new-chief-bullying-boozy-federalist-zealot-man-wants-run-affairs-dock-massive-tax-avoidance-country.htmlBy Daniel Hannan MEP, for the Daily Mail
Published: 01:01 GMT, 14 November 2014The man who leads the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker (pictured), was, it seems, responsible for Luxembourg’s dodgy tax regime
What a typical, hypocritcal, stinking Euro-shambles.Leaked documents indicate that Luxembourg has been offering secretive deals to mega-corporations which allow them to pay almost no tax.Some 28,000 pages have come to light and what they show is ugly.Luxembourg, for all its notional commitment to international norms on tax disclosure and transparency, appears to have allowed multi-nationals to strike special deals clandestinely.
Over the years, Luxembourg, as a tax haven, has offered global giants such as Vodafone and GlaxoSmith-Kline the opportunity to escape tax by channelling their billions through the Grand Duchy’s companies.
Not surprisingly, the French, Dutch and German governments are furious.
As they see it, Luxembourg has been luring investment away from their jurisdictions by doing things in private which it was not prepared to admit in public.
The European Commission, too, is riled, and has announced an investigation.
There is just one catch. The man who leads the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, was, it seems, responsible for Luxembourg’s dodgy tax regime.
He served as prime minister for 17 years and was simultaneously finance minister for much of that time.
Like so many European Commissioners before him, Juncker was given the Brussels job after being rejected by his domestic electorate.
The European Commission has this unusual distinction of being not so much undemocratic as anti-democratic, in the sense that people generally get appointed only after being rejected by their voters.
Neil Kinnock (who lost two consecutive general elections for Labour) and Chris Patten (who, despite being Tory chairman in 1992, lost his own parliamentary seat) are two supreme examples.
It would, of course, be absurd to have President Juncker investigate former Prime Minister Juncker.
The Luxembourger has therefore announced an independent inquiry, and it would be wrong to anticipate its findings.
Still, the critics can hardly be blamed for asking very embarrassing questions.
This, after all, is the man who, at the height of the financial crisis in the Eurozone, blithely insisted that bailouts were not needed.
Everyone knew they were coming, but he kept denying them, supposedly to reassure the markets.
He was also the man who cheerfully explained that ‘when it gets serious, you have to lie’.
Well, Mr Juncker, it’s looking pretty serious now.
Just weeks after taking office, the new Commission has been badly weakened.
Bloomberg, the world’s leading financial news service, has called for Juncker to stand down – and plenty of Brussels officials and politicians privately agree.
The Grand Duchy won its status as an attractive corporate tax haven thanks to its position at the heart of Europe, having been a founder member of the European Economic Community in 1957.
Like so many European Commissioners before him, Jean-Claude Juncker (pictured) was given the Brussels job after being rejected by his domestic electorate
Like so many European Commissioners before him, Jean-Claude Juncker (pictured) was given the Brussels job after being rejected by his domestic electorate
Despite his homeland’s questionable reputation, Brussels politicians – almost to a man and woman – recently voted Juncker into office.
Of the 28 member countries, only two, the UK and Hungary, stood apart from the fawning crowd.
Inevitably, the big blocs of Euro-integrationist MEPs, the Socialists, Liberals and Christian Democrats, were quick to endorse him.
Yet, almost none of them did so with enthusiasm. It was almost impossible to find anyone with a good word for Juncker at the time.
He was, Brussels insiders mournfully told each other, fond of a drink and rude to staff, abrupt and abrasive, with a short attention span and a shorter temper.
He had quit as Luxembourg’s prime minister after a huge scandal over the country’s security services’ abuse of their power under his watch – allegedly placing illegal wiretaps to monitor leading national figures.
It is discreditable that so many national leaders voted for Jean-Claude Juncker despite his manifest flaws
Mr Juncker’s lack of suitability for the top EU job was plain to see, and it is discreditable that so many MEPs and so many national leaders voted for him despite his manifest flaws.
I mentioned at the time that you could barely find a single politician or official who was privately prepared to defend him. But, as often happens on these occasions, a collective suspension of disbelief set in.
Why, then, was he appointed? It’s hardly as though it was Luxembourg’s turn. The Grand Duchy has about the same number of inhabitants as Sheffield.
It accounts for 0.06 per cent of the EU’s population but has supplied three Commission presidents – the only country to have done so.
In truth, Juncker had just one recommendation to arch-federalists; one that, it seems, cancelled out all the drawbacks.
He was, and is, an extreme advocate of turning Europe into something like a single country.
He wants an EU police force and army, a pan-European minimum wage, and a common EU citizenship with voting rights in all national elections.
In the current ‘Europe right or wrong’ atmosphere that dominates Brussels, this is all that counts.
Euro-enthusiasts warmly approved of the way Juncker prioritised the survival of the euro over the prosperity of the people who used it.
Even as unemployment reached critical levels in Spain and Greece, he made clear that nothing would be allowed to call into question the ‘irreversibility’ of monetary union.
He took the same undemocratic attitude to political union. When the French and Dutch people threw out the European Constitution in referendums in 2005, Juncker perversely declared that ‘the French and Dutch have not voted No’.
T o the rest of us, it seemed like some sort of joke, but Euro-federalists roared their approval. And, sure enough, the votes were disregarded and the constitution imposed anyway under a new name.
Nor have his opinions mellowed since then.
In his first speech to MEPs following his election in May, Juncker began by praising the father of Euro-federalism, French socialist Jacques Delors, and described the euro as a source of protection in an unstable world. (Not a view shared, I’d have thought, by the 19 million unemployed in the Eurozone.)
He went on to call for fiscal union, a bigger budget and the amalgamation of national foreign policies.
Although few heads of government liked him – they had spent too many summits in his presence – he still attracts widespread support from Euro-federalists.
Not quite so with the public, though. A major poll carried out immediately after his election found that across the EU as a whole, only 8.2 per cent of voters had heard of Juncker.
Still, Eurocrats and politicians suspended their disbelief and pretended that Juncker had secured some sort of democratic mandate.
Juncker appears, like so many Eurocrats before him, to have been saying one thing in public and doing another in private
What makes these new revelations so awkward is that, as a candidate, Juncker campaigned for tax harmonisation.
The long-term solution to the euro crisis, he said, was to have a common fiscal policy, leading, ultimately, to taxes being directly levied by Brussels.
The leaked documents, to put this as neutrally as I can, are very hard to square with that official policy.
The fact is that, if true, they are a devastating exposure of Juncker’s hypocrisy: on the one hand, he is a leading advocate of tax harmonisation across the 28 countries of the EU, but on the other, he is an unapologetic central player in a multi-billion-pound tax avoidance scheme based in just one of those countries – his own.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m all for tax competition between nations, provided it’s transparent. Competition, after all, is what keeps tax rates down.
But Juncker appears, like so many Eurocrats before him, to have been saying one thing in public and doing another in private.
Where does all this leave Britain? Well, it was to David Cameron’s credit that he resisted the pressure to endorse Juncker.
Some other national leaders may well be feeling a little sheepish now. So, I suspect, are a lot of the MEPs who backed the Juncker Commission.
Still, being right when others have made a mistake is not a comfortable position in this case. Nobody likes a smart-aleck.
Indeed, I’ve noticed, since the euro crisis began, that Britain has become much more unpopular in Brussels. Every new setback for the EU, including this one, somehow ends up being Britain’s fault.
Nonetheless, Juncker’s palpable disqualifications will surely strengthen the hand of those who want a free-trade rather than political relationship with the EU.
Just one look at this tainted individual leads to one inevitable question: Is this really the type of man we want governing us?
DANIEL HANNAN is a Conservative MEP
CORRUPTION AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN LUXEMBOURG ?
We have been telling our friends in Luxembourg for 6 years, that the Landsbanki bankruptcy scandal with the abuse of European pensioners, was severely damaging Luxembourg’s image and awakening International attention to the behind-the-doors, illicit Financial Trafficking going on.
Rogue members of the Judiciary seem to have been especially selected to classify criminal files and make fraud and money laundering another ‘Made In Luxembourg’ speciality to be brushed aside by the Politicians in awe and fear of Juncker who set the whole Luxembourg “system” up.
The people of Luxembourg are paying for the corrupt ” system” that has taken it’s roots in this beautiful little country.
Luxembourg is now invaded by the least ethical, the most selfish, the gangsters, banksters and crooks and all the companies run by short-sighted greedy men who do not care about the role they are playing in world-wide poverty and the spread of corruption.
The products from these companies are tainted and second-rate now and the consumer will avoid them as consumers avoid any Luxembourg products as even this new government is unwilling to admit that there are serious problems with the laws and with a large section of the judiciary who agree with the abusive methods to protect the financial criminals and continue consumer abuse.
The rotten element in the judiciary will systematically ensure the financial delinquents will win their cases and the consumer loses every time.
Consumer cases are systematically thrown out and the evidence of fraud is systematically ignored by the corrupt within the system.
This is a sad reality which even the brave and eloquent Gaston Vogel, in his letter to Xavier Bettel, could obviously not put out in the public arena. Here is a man who loves Luxembourg as it was before the gangster-bankster invasion, which turned Luxembourg into one BIG BAD BANK!
Gaston Vogel would like the people of Luxembourg to be the most important and for cultural possibilities to be available for the people of Luxembourg as well as shops for them and not that Banks, business and lawlessness should take precedence over what is beautiful , fair and something to be proud of.
Everyone knows, including Juncker, that there are serious problems in the laws and in the way some lawyers and judges handle the Financial fraud and money laundering cases.
However, is this not what Juncker & cronies wanted when they encouraged criminals and cheats to invade this beautiful little country which has been destroyed by this mass of banksters, nouveaux riches and empty vulgarity that does not belong in what was once a charming, friendly country one would be happy to visit?
Now people are afraid to go to Luxembourg as the chances are you will bump into the worst elements in International society in a concentrated area and you certainly cannot expect justice, as a consumer, from Luxembourg.
Surely the old Luxembourg with it’s real people, small shops for Luxembourgeois families, local restaurants and traditions, local produce, was better than this cold place for behind-closed-doors dirty business and lawlessness upheld by a judiciary which is clearly not fit for purpose?
How can a few courageous, ethical, professional lawyers stand up and change what so many of their colleagues are refusing to clean-up?
We warned our friends in Luxembourg about the International damage Yvette Hamilius was causing to Luxembourg.
All you have to do is to read all our Facebook messages to our friends in Luxembourg who are not in finance and do not deserve to pay for the banking Crimes any more than we do and you can read what we have been saying for years.
This scandal was because no one did anything to stop the abuse of ordinary consumers across the world as big and powerful banks, companies, dictators and criminals were protected just to get their money into the Luxembourg banks.
The outrageous behaviour of the judiciary protecting this fraudulent bankruptcy administration and the arrogance and lies of the administrator Yvette Hamilius, was being noticed by International Reporters who were contacting us to see the evidences of fraud in our files.
We have had politicians and Journalists wanting to examine our files and this is not just from Europe but from other countries.
These people from across the world who were beginning to see that there were far worse things than Tax evasion being trafficked through Luxembourg and that the Icelandic crash was greatly enabled by the Luxembourg financial Place and it’s rogue members of the judiciary where even the Procureur Generel or Attorney general, Robert Biever, was seen to leap into the defence of a Criminally accused bank and an administrator who is under suspicion of being behind the money laundering of the issue of fraud as she seized assets from the victims of the bankruptcy.
Guess who her lawyer was during these years? None other than the Vice president of the Luxembourg Bar Rosario Grosso.
Guess what rosario Grosso is now?
He is the PRESIDENT of the Bar and Yvette Hamilius, as the people of Luxembourg know, is a Juncker protégé who obviously got her arrogance and tendencies to lie to the people of Luxembourg from the grand master ex PM and now PRESIDENT of the European Union.
What a stitch-up! How sad to see the new government grovelling and crawling around humiliating the people of Luxembourg even more, by jumping to protect Juncker, who is the reason Luxembourg is not for the Luxembourgeois any more , but for the Bangsters, cheats and crooks of the world who know they can count on a bent “system”, protected by lawlessness and manipulation of laws and rules to fit the Financial crimes those who have invaded Luxembourg need.
We told the good people of Luxembourg who are our friends, that this scandal was going to destroy Luxembourg’s reputation as it was bringing the other Financial scandals into public attention and the Juncker supporters were too used to doing what they wanted with no sanction.
What we were saying to the ordinary citizens of Luxembourg, was true.
The powerful judiciary and politicians continuing with the Juncker penchant for encouraging, protecting and denying Financial Crime, was going to destroy Luxembourg in the long run.
Our lives have been destroyed and the Luxembourg reputation has been destroyed just like we said it would and we all know there are serious crimes being protected by those like Hamilius protesting there is “no fraud”and “no problem”in the file they do not want investigated.
Luxembourg has destroyed good, decent people to protect the worst people in society and all that for money which is not for the citizens of Luxembourg.
Why are even the new Politicians voted in for CHANGE and TRANSPARENCY,still in DENIAL?
Juncker was surrounded by all those in the Conflict of Interests game, colluding alongside him to enable Financial delinquency, Financial Crime and abuse of the consumer and investor and have transformed Luxembourg into one BIG BAD Bank with a judiciary not fit for the purpose of putting a STOP to everything which is abusive.
There are excellent ethical lawyers in Luxembourg, but they do not have a voice when those in the powerful spots want to continue the Juncker financial delinquency regime which has destroyed their country for their citizens.
GROUP OF VICTIMS WRITES:
4th April 2014
A BANKRUPTCY ADMINISTRATION FROM HELL…
In Luxembourg in the heart of the E.U. in the hands of the Luxembourg Financial administrator, Yvette Hamilius and her supervising judge Karin Guillaume.
How NOT to do things in Europe today.
LUXEMBOURG COURTS in Landsbanki Case First Instance and Appeal.
Example shown below of a case with 200 DAYS OF DELAYS to create maximum cost, stress and anguish to victims and to ensure they LOSE in first instance and appeal and cannot afford to go on to Cassation especially when Luxembourg lawyers say ‘there is no point, you are almost 100% certain to lose despite the strength of your case. This is why you will lose and it is very expensive”!
This scandal is not fair on the people of Luxembourg.
This scandal is not fair on the European pensioners who are fighting for justice for over 6 years with 22 deaths of fellow victims, attempted suicides and serious stress-related illness in hundreds of victims whose lives have been destroyed by an abusive administration rather than by a bankruptcy of a bank.
Such abhorrent rudeness and arrogance from the lawyer administrator, Yvette Hamilus has never been seen before in London, France and Spain.
In this disgraceful case of abuse of power and conflict of interests by a Luxembourg lawyer, TOP lawyers in London and France have protested openly and even written letters of complaint for the Courts.
International press (outside Luxembourg, of course, have voiced the outrage felt particularly within the European legal profession, about the lack of professionalism, ethics and RESPECT that is being put on display in the name of the Luxembourg Justice system.) Yvette Hamilius is a lose canon for Luxembourg.
Is this fair to all the ethical, honourable lawyers and judges in Luxembourg who are embarrassed and ashamed of the international circus performance this legal Tandem has put on display in the name of Luxembourg?
NO IT IS NOT!
The Hamlius/Guillaume spectacle of an ADMINISTRATION FROM HELL, is destroying the lives of thousands of people in Europe and damaging Luxembourg in the process.
The European Commission must look into the breaches of E.U. law and ethics which is being used to undermine and take advantage of the E.U. by abusing the rulings to Financial advantage and to win cases where there is evidence of serious LAUNDERING OF FINANCIAL CRIME.
Here is a case showing the 200 DAYS of DELAYS or the Luxembourg Court experience of victims of Yvette Hamilius and Karin Guillaume’s administration of
LANDSBANKI LUXEMBOURG S.A.
The clients of course LOST in first instance and in appeal and their case was not even looked into as lie upon lie was accepted in the Luxembourg Courts without proper investigation, accepting all the lies by the administrator.
LIES? YES, BLATANT LIES in order to win.
Luxembourg has been lied to, the honourable judges have been lied to and the Procureur, ROBERT BIEVER, was probably lied to, in view of the embarrassing interview he gave in the press, in speedy defence of the Guillaume/Hamilius Tandem, obviously not having looked into the individual cases where fraud is evident, but simply taken their word as a lawyer and a judge.
Ethics and laws and rulings ratified by Luxembourg’s LUC FRIEDEN, have been trashed, by the administration, as the NEED and GREED to win, possesses the lawyer and judge who ignore the rulings on the professional duty to investigate and denounce all allegations of false accounting and suspicious transactions and embezzled money which could show the possibilities of MONEY LAUNDERING we have been suspecting and denouncing for years, as European citizens, victims of Financial Fraud and the LAUNDERING OF FINANCIAL CRIME BY A LUXEMBOURG ADMINISTRATION.
The clients of course LOST in first instance and in appeal were advised by 2 top Luxembourg law firms that there was NO POINT going to Cassation as they would LOSE and they could not afford to pay as the First instance and the appeal had cost everything and no one had listened to the evidence of serious financial crime.
They were UP AGAINST A WALL of cover-up of Financial Crime in the heart of Europe.
This case, as so many others was doomed to be lost from the outset like all those who were deliberately intended to ‘MISS THE TRAIN” after the HAMILIUS/GUILLAUME Tandem created as much confusion as possible around the important Deadline of Declaration of Claims which they changed the date of and then announced the new date in a couple of obscure newspapers the pensioners would never read.
Not in DURABLE MEDIUM or recorded delivery letters like all the demands for money were sent to the clients!
How clever Y.Hamilius and her Luxembourg lawyers must have thought they were, to get so many victims to “MISS THE TRAIN’ and so automatically lose their case!
ROSARIO GROSSO in peacock mode, was so confident that Hamilius was not breaching any E.U. rules and regulations and had not lied by omission of fact, document, letters and truth to him and ROBERT BIEVER, that he too JOINED THE CIRCUS performance without checking the facts and the correspondance to Hamilius from victims who were desperately trying to pay back what they drew down from the bank for years and were be