Photo ANP / Martijn Beekman
MP Linda Voortman (Green) will explain the role of Chamber President Anouchka van Miltenburg (VVD) and the Board of the House have played in an affair around Voortman last summer. The politician questions the decisions that led to judicial investigations instituted against it because of the leakage of names of candidates for the post of National Ombudsman. She argues that as everything was handled may never have been accused well.
In a letter to the state presidency that Voortman according to justice not as a suspect had to be considered. The Member of Parliament, which was suspended in December but was purified of all blame, wants to know why there declaration was made against it, as can be read in a letter that NRC and Nieuwsuur have recognized. She asks why Van Miltenburg and the board of the Chamber passed to declaration, instead of a more limited scope for investigation by the National Police.
“I’ve been half a year suspect of malfeasance. My integrity is questioned. It seems that people have wanted to harm me deliberately damage “
Voortman was suspended at the request of herself and her group after Van Miltenburg threatened with action (ie. Declarations of ‘alleged violation of confidentiality). The Presidium decided despite this “promise” yet to declare at this point. Voortman wants to know how this could happen.
In addition, the parliamentarian clarify the source of suspicion on her person in The Telegraph on 25 June. She writes:
“At that time, from the conversation that the Chamber President had with me had on June 19 already clear that I could not possibly leak because I never know had leaked all the names. “
In June leaked out that the former director of the ANWV, Guido van Woerkom, would be appointed as the new National Ombudsman. Once his name circulated as a candidate gave the Moroccan community to know that she was not interested in this because of a controversial ruling by Van Woerkom in the past about a Moroccan taxi driver. Part of the House had agreed. Eventually, a majority (91 of 144) for the nomination, but nevertheless Van Woerkom withdrew
What could be the consequences for Van Miltenburg -. Which had previously been criticized (€) – is unclear. What exactly happened remains to be seen, said political editor Tom-Jan Meeus. “The facts are not very hard”
No comments:
Post a Comment