Citaat | Parket bij de Hoge Raad 19 december 2014

Onder 4.23 Parket bij de Hoge Raad 19 december 2014

Een alinea uit Parket bij de Hoge Raad 19 december 2014, ECLI:NL:PHR:2014:2728.

72. The Government pointed out that the obligation to provide information in the enforcement inquiry should be considered against the background of the protection by the provisions on confidentiality of any incriminating information received. The Court notes that it is true that the Bailiff was bound by professional secrecy. However, it is not apparent that the creditors applying for enforcement were prohibited from using any information received to their personal benefit in the pending criminal proceedings. Thus, the application of the Openness of Government Activities Act could not change the choice presented by Chapter 3, section 34(d), of the Enforcement Act: either the applicant provided the information requested or he faced the imposition of an administrative fine. The Court also notes that the Government did not refer to any domestic case-law which would have authoritatively excluded the later admission in evidence against the applicant of any statements made by him in the enforcement inquiry.

Zelf controleren

Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/f3dee8bfcc9e25b9bc28b784114a4ec9f09296e7ba0a534d40e9085faf4ef1c5. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt f3dee8bfcc9e25b9bc28b784114a4ec9f09296e7ba0a534d40e9085faf4ef1c5, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 76071 tot 77100.