The Justice and Security Inspectorate will use the information sent by R. Geissen for a risk analysis

Posted on by
caret-down caret-up caret-left caret-right
Narges Achikzei, who was set on fire, and her boyfriend had a heated conflict with the woman's 32-year-old former employer in Utrecht. The family is associated with fraudulent practices. In any case, they were accused by an aggrieved man. He himself was summoned to a court one week after the fire murder in connection with the slander. For a long time he is said to have sent e-mails to the woman - an ex-worker - and damaged her honour and good name.

It is very likely that this conflict played a role in the cruel death. The public prosecutor's office never wants to answer questions about the content of the legal conflict. It is clear that the conflict exerted great pressure on Achikzei and other participants.

Communication – IVENJ <communicatie@inspectievenj.nl>
di 26 feb. 08:52
to Geissen

Dear Mr. Geissen,

On 31 January last, the Justice and Security Inspectorate informed you that it saw no reason to investigate your report to the police, because the Inspectorate did not find any signs that could indicate a structural problem in the investigation. You indicate that, in your opinion, there is indeed a structural problem.

As you have already been informed, the Inspectorate does not see any reason for an investigation at the moment. The Inspectorate does, however, include the information you have sent in a risk analysis, which forms the basis for an annual work programme.

Further correspondence on this subject will only lead to a repetition of points of view. I do not think that this makes sense. Therefore, the Inspectorate will not respond to any further correspondence or other requests on this matter.

Kind regards,

Mr E. Riks
Chief Inspector of the Justice and Security Inspectorate

Communication – IVENJ <communicatie@inspectievenj.nl>
do 31 Jan. 12:55

Dear Mr. Geissen,

You contacted the Justice and Security Inspectorate via Twitter and then by email. From your messages I conclude that you have complaints about officials of the police and the Public Prosecutor’s Office. You state that these officials have behaved in a corrupt manner.

The Inspectorate supervises the execution of tasks by the police, such as the quality of the investigation. Possible criminal behaviour of individual police officers should be investigated by the National Police Department. If, in your opinion, this is the case, you can report it to the Chief Public Prosecutor. Signals that may indicate a structural problem in the investigation may lead the Inspectorate to start an investigation. The Inspectorate has not found that in your case there have been any problems that indicate a more structural problem in the execution of tasks by the police. The Inspectorate therefore sees no reason to investigate your report.

The Inspectorate does not supervise the functioning of members of the Public Prosecution Service. Pursuant to Article 122 of the Judicial Organisation Act, the Procurator General of the Supreme Court is authorised to investigate whether the Public Prosecution Service is properly enforcing or implementing the statutory provisions in the performance of its duties. The website of the Public Prosecution Service contains information about where you can submit your complaint (www.om.nl/contact/klachten).

I trust that I have provided you with sufficient information in this regard.

Kind regards,

Mr E. Riks
Chief Inspector of the Justice and Security Inspectorate

Posted in Dutch authorities, Innovation, Investigation, Murder Narges Achikzei, Timeline, Whistleblower and tagged , , , , , , .