The Netherlands is failing to get a grip on Dutch involvement in corruption overseas. Legislation passed in 2001 has not resulted in a single prosecution. Meanwhile, it’s left to other countries to bring Dutch companies to book.

According to the World Trade Organisation, the Netherlands is one of the world’s top five exporting countries. This means it has plenty of dealings in countries where bribery and corruption are the order of the day. Last week in Chile two generals were arrested because in the 1990s they had accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes from a Dutch company. But even with new legislation in place to ban Dutch companies from bribing foreign officials, still no charges have been brought in the Netherlands. The Labour Party is demanding an explanation from the justice minister.

The United States, which has stricter legislation, has started legal proceedings against Dutch oil giant Shell. The company has been linked with a corruption case in Nigeria, where it obtains most of its oil.

Top priority
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which is bringing the charges, can’t say how far its investigations have progressed, according to its spokesman Erik Hotmire. But it’s only too obvious that Shell is under fire from the other side of the Atlantic. Also to Shell itself. Under the heading ‘risks’, the company’s annual reports for 2007 and 2008 openly include the possibility of fines for its practices in Nigeria.

The fight against corruption has been a top priority in the United States for years. The country therefore regularly looks askance at the Netherlands, which pays little attention to the matter, according to a specialist involved in the case on behalf of the Dutch public prosecutor’s office, who prefers to remain anonymous. The new anti-bribery law, which came into force in 2001, has apparently done little to change this.

Charges dismissed
The charges against Shell have little to do with the United States or US interests. There a country can be collared if it has so much as a postal address on US soil. It isn’t clear whether the Dutch public prosecutor’s office will be asked to take over the case. The Justice Ministry declines to comment on ‘individual cases’.

Since 2001 the Netherlands has investigated 12 cases to see whether it was possible to bring charges, but none of the cases got any further. Specially appointed corruption officer, Jack van Zijl, ruled that there was insufficient evidence to bring charges in many cases and was forced to dismiss them. Not a single Dutch person suspected of bribing foreign officials has been brought to justice.

Evidence
According to Paul Frielink, Extraordinary Professor of Public Prosecutor Studies at Maastricht University, it’s hard to track down evidence of corruption in so-called ‘banana republics’.

“Both the buyer and the briber are keen to have keep their practices quiet. They are secretive about it.”

What’s more, the Netherlands has a lot less experience in the matter than the United States does, says Professor Frielink, pointing out that the Dutch law only recently came into force. “Before it wasn’t even possible to deal with this type of case.”

Political or economic interests may also stand in the way of a court case. Shell is one of the world’s largest companies, a calling card and a huge source of income for the Netherlands. Professor Frielink is aware that such considerations have an influence, but he hopes that they won’t be a deciding factor.

"It’s not just about the Netherlands’ standing but also about commercial interests. The company’s interests in the Netherlands, stock market considerations, and so on. There are many interests to consider. But ultimately I think that you have to let the balance tip in favour of prosecution.”

Scandal
According to Gerben Smid of Transparency International (an international organisation that critically assesses rules on dealing with corruption) it’s high time there was a real scandal in the Netherlands.“Then perhaps the wheels would really start turning”.

The Labour Party doesn’t want to wait that long. MP Ton Heerts wants an explanation from the Justice Minister immediately after the summer recess and plans to ask questions in the house. “That law was introduced in principle so that prosecutions could be brought successfully. As that hasn’t happened, I want to know whether it’s being given a high enough priority.”

Photo: ANP and Wikipedia