Conclusion AG: Ratify verdict against former prime minister of Curaçao and his partner
WILLEMSTAD, THE HAGUE - The convictions of the former prime minister of Curaçao Schotte and his life partner due to, among other things, official corruption and money laundering must remain in place. Attorney General Bleichrodt advises the Supreme Court in his conclusions that have been published today.
Schotte was a politician in Curaçao at the time of the proven criminal offenses. He founded the political party Movementu Future Korsou (MFK). With effect from 10 October 2010, Schotte was the first minister-president of Curaçao. He held this position until the end of September 2012. The co-defendant is his partner.
In the criminal case against suspect Schotte, official corruption is central. Among other things, the court found that suspect had accepted gifts that were intended to induce him to give preferential treatment to certain companies. Invoices that were sent in that context were, according to the court, falsified. The suspect and his co-defendant are also guilty of money laundering and the availability of so-called 'frequency jammers', which have been designed to cause disruptions in telecommunications.
Schotte was convicted to a prison sentence of three years. As an additional penalty, he is not allowed to participate as a candidate in any elections for five years. His partner received a prison sentence of fifteen months, six months of which were conditional for money laundering. Both suspects filed an appeal in cassation.
In his conclusions, the Attorney General extensively discusses the complaints made about Schotte. Among other things, the AG deals with the complaints that are directed against the evidence for the official bribery and the question whether Schotte knew at the moment of accepting the donations that those gifts were given to him as bribe.
Bleichrodt concludes in his advice that none of the fourteen cassation means in Schotte's case and the seven cassation means in the case of his co-defendant leads to the annulment of the court’s ruling. He therefore advises the Supreme Court to reject both cassation appeals and thus to uphold the rulings.
It is not yet known when the Supreme Court pronounces judgment in both cases.