Attorney Jairo Bloem is seen entering the courthouse in this file photo.
~After question about civil servants files~
PHILIPSBURG--“It is now appropriate for you to put down your pen,” attorney Jairo Bloem of SBA Advocaten told the judge on Wednesday at five minutes past two in the afternoon, after the court sought to continue the hearing. Moments earlier, Bloem had handed the judge and the two prosecutors a document. “This is the substantiation of my request for recusal. I will not elaborate on it orally; the document you have before you speaks for itself.”
Defendants Marisha Richardson and Jeffrey Bremer walked out of the courtroom alongside their attorney, Bloem, who appeared visibly livid. Bloem had not been present in court on Wednesday morning at the start of the third day of hearings in the Jasmine case against former Minister of Public Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure (VROMI) Christopher Emmanuel and four co-defendants. He had received a phone call from his fellow defense attorney after she stepped out of the courtroom for a moment, telling him that the judge had refused to admit additional evidence in the case against his clients and demanded to see him in court at 2:00pm.
On Wednesday morning at 9:00am, the prosecutor stated that the documents submitted by Bloem were inadmissible because they contained personal information about numerous government officials who, according to the prosecutor, “had nothing to do with the case.”
According to the prosecutor, the submission of these files constitutes a breach of privacy, and attorney Bloem would be held liable for this. “The Attorney General [Robbert-Jan Boswijk, Ed.] has already called attorney Bloem about these files,” the prosecutor said, stressing that a criminal investigation would be launched.
After the prosecutor claimed the new evidence was obtained through criminal action, the judge stated that she had received the files but did not open them. “This is not due to the fact that these were submitted late – I have been very lenient about this – but due to the description of the files, which is very worrisome to me.”
The judge said she would not open the files out of fear of the consequences for herself. “I will not allow these documents and do anything further. It’s up to the Public Prosecutor to decide on further actions,” she said. To Bloem’s colleague, she added: “Please call Bloem and tell him that I expect to see him here in person this afternoon.” The regular pleadings for the defence of Jeffrey Bremer and Marisha Richardson were scheduled for 2:00pm that afternoon.
The documents submitted allegedly contain proof of tens of companies owned and managed by persons employed by the Government, as well as information about government officials having “a second job.” These documents were submitted to support the defence of Richardson, who said on Monday that if she has to go to jail for being a shareholder of the company that received four (small) projects from Government in the aftermath of Hurricane Irma, then “many others in Government have to go to jail too.”
On Monday, Richardson said that the witnesses for the prosecution – former VROMI Secretary-General Louis Brown, current Head of New Works Kurt Ruan, and Head of Infrastructure Charlon Pompier – are not without fault themselves. “Brown owns a building opposite Nagico that he rented out to Government for years,” Richardson said as one of the examples. “Government is in business with him, and with many other employees too.”
The prosecutor, who demands 24 months in jail for Richardson and 18 months for her partner, insists that the Landsverordening Materieel Ambtenarenrecht (LMA) should be followed to the letter. This means that no government official is allowed to perform for-profit activities outside government function. Any outside job would require a formal request and approval from Government. In no case, however, would government officials be allowed to do business with Government.
“But Government is in business with half of its staff,” said Richardson, current head of Personnel and Organization (P&O) at the Ministry of General Affairs, serving the Prime Minister. “Why am I the only one being prosecuted?”
Bloem stressed that what he submitted is exculpatory evidence, meaning evidence that would clear his client of wrongdoing. “The judge has at minimum the obligation to read and consider any exculpatory evidence – even if this evidence was obtained without consent.”
He emphasised: “Every suspect has the right to defend him or herself. If there is any evidence to support the defendant’s case, a lawyer must submit the same. There’s no two ways about this. The judge should review that and in reviewing, following also the specific criteria adopted in the case law, decide if the evidence will be allowed, to what degree and with which possible safeguards to for example, protect the confidentiality of third parties. To however, instead immediately, without even a recess to consider, decide to exclude exculpatory evidence, without reading anything, out of a perceived concern of committing a criminal act herself, shows at minimum a semblance of partiality or biasness.”
Bloem added: “The Supreme Court decided on December 9, 2025 (ECLI:NL: PHR:2025:1099), to allow tape recordings made of the reporter Peter R. de Vries, without his knowledge, albeit with certain safeguards. Peter de Vries was later murdered after the recordings. How would any of the justices of the Supreme Court or the lower Courts, for that matter, be able to take a decision hereon, if they decided from the onset not to listen to the recordings and to exclude them immediately from the procedure, out of concern of committing a criminal act, or for any reason, for that matter?”
Attorney Bloem did not intend to halt legal proceedings, but said he considered himself obligated to do so. “Asking a justice to recuse her – or himself – is the last thing any lawyer wants to do for multiple reasons, but there is regretfully, simply no other option in this case.”
The Wrakingskamer (Court of Recusal) will review the motion for recusal on Thursday at 8:30am and is expected to render its decision shortly thereafter.
