Canadian/Belgian citizen Dennis van Kerrebroeck, 34, illegally detained for 24 months in filthy trial-awaiting South African prison.
This April 10 2013 in the Pretoria High Court, a Belgian/Canadian businessman is appearing once again in yet another desperate attempt to gain his freedom -- after 24 months in a filthy overcrowded South African trial-awaiting prison. His trial on trumped up 'diamond theft' charges -- for an 'offence' which didn't even occur inside South Africa -- starts in June unless it is admitted on April 10 at an appeal-hearing by the Pretoria court that the SA government has no jurisdiction to hear this case - and should release Belgian/Canadian businessman Dennis van Kerrebroeck. He has already provided massive documentation to two law=courts proving his innocence - even though under SA law it's the State which should be proving his guilt instead...
South African officials perjured themselves and issued falsified documents:
Dennis van Kerrebroeck has been unwittingly caught up in one of the most intriguing untold stories of 2013. It involves a stunning, unique 68-karat South African diamond, a gem so beautifully flawless that officials in South Africa were even willing to perjure themselves with false statements and trumped-up charges -- allegedly just to cover up the rising suspicion internationally that South Africa may be involved in illegal export-practices of diamonds with the illicit use of Kimberley Certificates.The stakes are high: there are growing calls that South Africa's Kimberley-certificate export rights should be cancelled altogether...
SA officials are meanwhile illegally keeping the Belgian/Canadian businessman imprisoned in a case over which his legal counsel insist the government have no jurisdiction at all: the alleged offence did not occur inside South Africa - and that Van Kerrebroeck has become the 'patsy' to cover up an elaborate diamond-smuggling scheme...
Most bizarre lawsuit ever - against the 'arrested' diamond;
The diamond also is at the centre of the most bizarre lawsuit ever filed in the USA by the Federal Bureau of Investigation - which has 'arrested' the diamond on March 6, 2010 after it was cut at Taly's Diamonds on Fifth Avenue, New York. The FBI is actually 'suing' the beautiful gem itself. As was noted on the AllGov.com news site, 'the bizarreness of this story is best captured in the official title of the American lawsuit: "United States versus One Polished Diamond Weighing approximately 68 carats'.
The original raw diamond was found in November 2008 in the diamond-rich North Cape province of South Africa. It caused a flurry of excitement on the international diamond markets and the secret bidding for the uncut gem was reportedly heavy. Uncut, this diamond was 143 carats: cut it now is 68 carats: the same size as the Krupp diamond given to the stunning US actress Elizabeth Taylor in 1969 by her husband, actor Richard Burton.
International row:
An international row has erupted over who exactly owns it legally. Taly's says it's theirs and are still trying to get it back. Van Kerrebroeck says he was defrauded - and a top international law expert who deals with diamond-deals every day, agrees with him. Even the original owners back in South Africa now also admitted recently that the sale had been dodgy. But still, the defrauded man languishes in Diepkloof prison. Why?
Whose diamond is it? International Legal Expert Opinion:
On the face of it, the appearance was presented that the raw diamond was legally exported via the legal Kimberley Certificate ZA008750 to Mr Adrianus Vriends in Geneve, Switzerland by the owners of Higgs Diamond Pty Ltd and sold to Vriends who is/was a Higgs company partner. The certificates show that Brinks had therefore transported the uncut diamond legally. Documents below:
Then, mysteriously, Mr Minnaar Higgs and his partners in Higgs Diamond Pty Ltd had 'sold' the same raw diamond again -- even though Higgs clearly no longer legally owned it, having shipped it to Geneva for $3,5million -- this time Higgs Diamonds sold the uncut gem to Mr Dennis van Kerrebroeck. It was apparently claimed by seller Higgs and his partners that 'the bottom had dropped out of the diamond market' and Higgs and partners had offered Van Kerrebroeck the raw diamond - at a much lower price. Mr Van Kerrebroeck 's company Belgo-Navada Ltd then sold the gem to Fifth Avenue merchant Taly Diamonds in September 2009. It was at Taly's that the diamond was cut and polished. And it was from Taly Diamonds that the FBI seized the polished diamond - amidst a flurry of publicity in which unnamed 'sources' claimed that Van Kerrebroeck was a 'con artist'. However, international law-experts in Antwerp - experts at diamond-dealings - say that Van Kerrebroeck and his company 'are not to blame as they were themselves the victims of a fraud" ..
http://gothamist.com/2010/03/06/33_m_diamond_seized_on_fifth_avenue.php
Who is the legal owner of the 68karat diamond? "Van Kerrebroeck was the victim of a fraud writes top international legal expert: "
In documents before the SA court to secure Mr Van Kerrebroeck's release, the top Belgian international law advocate Karel Mul wrote that Mr Van Kerrebroeck and his company clearly were the 'victims of a fraud'. Mul wrote in his legal opinion lodged during Van Kerrebroeck's bail application, that Mr Vriends is still the legal owner of the diamond.
Van Kerrebroeck submitted overwhelming evidence of his innocence and proof that revenue official was bribed to get the Kimberley Certificate: (below)
That's why the precious and beautiful gem, which should be gracing the neck of a beautiful woman, still rests in the dark recesses of an FBI-safe. And that's why Dennis van Kerrebroeck, the Belgian/Canadian businessman who was illegally arrested in South Africa, has now also been languishing in a filthy, dangerous South African trial-awaiting prison for 24 months. He's appeared numerous times in near-hopeless attempts to get bail. His family has submitted countless appeals with officials in Canada and Belgium to secure his release. And -- even though under SA law he does not have to prove his innocence - ( the State instead has to prove his guilt) - he also has submitted numerous documents proving his innocence - and also lodged an appeal saying that the SA courts have no jurisdiction in this case as the alleged 'offence' had occurred outside the country.
Van Kerrebroeck should never have been in jail for these non-violent charges he is accused of in the first place: he should have been granted bail for such a minor non-violent offence. In South Africa even murder-suspects are granted bail - indeed as low as R1000 -- while awaiting trial: it takes from two years to ten years to complete a trial: the infamous Boeremag-21 trial now is in its 10th year and in that time only had 42 actual days hearing evidence in court.
- And similar to the Van Kerrebroeck case, there's also considerable evidence of police-fraud: this case was blown wide-open over the past three months with revelations that the entire Boeremag21 case was fabricated out of whole cloth by senior Afrikaner-SAPS officers (in the crime-intelligence section) to secure their own careers in the SAPS -- at a time when the majority of white cops are being replaced with black South Africans: http://censorbugbear-reports.blogspot.nl/2012/10/boeremag-orchestrated-by-crime-intel.html
The hellhole of Diepsloot trial-awaiting prison:
His next court date is on April 10 in the Johannesburg High Court - when more documents will be submitted in increasingly desperate attempts to get him out of that filthy Diepsloot trial-awaiting prison. The Diepkloof trial-awaiting prison outside Randburg, cynically referred to as 'Sun City' by inmates, is described as a "a shit-hole with 250% over-capacity". This prison is no “five-star hotel.” This prison, and most others like it in South Africa, is worse than a refugee camp. A source close to Van Kerrebroeck describes it as 'an absolute shit-hole: Diepkloof operates at least 250% capacity. For instance, the cellblock where Dennis is being held, hasn’t been cleaned properly or professionally once in the many long months he’s been there. There is one toilet to service 70-90 people from the cellblock. Prisoners have to manually fill a bucket of water and pour it into the toilet to flush it. There is also only one shower and it is filthy with all sorts of bacteria and fungi spread all over it. This cellblock is for detainees awaiting trial. They have not been convicted of any crime and are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law as it is stated in the South African Constitution. "
Inaccurate statement to court by Kimberley investigating officer Col Luis: diamond was sent to Geneva 'on tender' (which is illegal):
Why is there such a massive reluctance in South Africa to release this businessman -- who when one peruses all the documents submitted to the courts in SA, clearly was the victim of a fraud by some pretty dodgy South Africans? There has even been false information planted in foreign news media outlets describing him as a 'con artist'.
Above: And Van Kerrebroeck was denied bail on May 26 2012 (case RC 128/11/CD2-YM-24/03/2011) for only one reason: namely the false testimony by investigating officer Lt-Colonel Luis -of Kimberley, both he and the state-prosecutor claiming falsely that (1) Belgium had no extradiction treaty with SA"; and that the diamond had been 'sent to Geneva on spec'. Which is illegal under law ruling the export of diamonds from South Africa under the Kimberley Process.
Evidence of fraud regarding the Kimberley Certificate's export license documentation by complainant, geologist David Griffiths:
Mr Van Kerrebroeck has also lodged counter-charges at the SAPS Johannesburg Central Office on August 31 2011 against the two men whose formal complaints caused his plight: namely the geologist David Griffiths of Easresrouces, and Griffiths' former partner, the legal owner of the 'stolen' diamond, namely Minnaar Higgs. (CAS 570/09/11)
August 31 2011 charge at SAPS: claiming that a SA Revenue Service worker was bribed to produce a Kimberley Certificate for this diamond:
BELOW: There also was a failed attempt to fabricate evidence against Mr Van Kerrebroeck by an investigating North Cape police officer, Captain AP van Rooyen: who coerced a trial-awaiting SA prisoner, Wouter Viljoen, into signing a false statement trying to implicate Mr Van Kerrebroeck. Viljoen later admitted that he had been "asked to sign a prepared document falsely accusing the Belgian businessman of having Van Kerrebroeck's police docket stolen for R20,000.”
This kind of fraud is widespread in the South African police forces: As an illustration of the widespread, systemic fraud and corruption in the SA Police Service, one need only read the testimony at the Boeremag21 trial - or articles such as in The Right Perspective, dd May 4 2010, noting that over 10,000 police officials were in prison in SA for often very serious offences ranging from blackmail, fraud to murder, attempted murder and rape. http://www.therightperspective.org/2010/05/04/10000-south-african-cops-in-jail/
What says the international law concerning the legal export of unpolished diamonds with a Kimberley Certificate?
According to the dates of the South African Kimberley Certificate for this diamond, its date of issue was June 19, 2009; its expiry date was July 19, 2009. If Adrianus Vriends, the importer in Antwerp, Belgium - failed to pay Minnaar Higgs, the owner and exporter, US $3.5-million for the diamond by the expiration date of the certificate of July 19, 2009, then by law that diamond had to be shipped back to Mr Minnaar Higgs in South Africa. This however did not happen and moreover, Mr Adrianus Vriends in Belgium never paid his partner, (Higgs) the US $3.5million invoiced for the diamond. The men claimed that the diamond 'was shipped on spec' however that's illegal under the Kimberley Process....
- All unpolished diamonds intended for export purposes (from South Africa) must first in the prescribed manner be offered at a diamond exchange and export centre.”.No.28513 Government Gazette: 14 February 2006 Act No. 30,2005 Diamonds Second Amendment Act 2005 -http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=67884
All rough SA diamonds must first be offered for sale to a South African buyer - by law. This did not happen with this gem: it was sent to Geneva 'on tender'...
Simply put, as required under the Diamonds Second Amendment Act 2005, all rough diamonds must first be offered for sale to a South African buyer before being considered for export. This did not happen. In Kimberley investigating SAPS officer's Colonel Fernando Luis' affidavit he stated that the diamond was 'being exported to Geneva to be tendered". This is in fact illegal: Moreover, in the SA Mutual League Assistance request to the United States, SA's South-Gauteng province's director of Public Prosecutions Andrew Chuke also committed perjury when he stated that 'the diamond was legally exported from South Africa and was sent to Geneva to be put on tender". Lying to the United States Federal Government is a felony and also a violation of South Africa's Mutual League Assistance Treaty with the United States.
However, on Thursday February 21st, 2013, Magistrate Brian Nemavhidi, ruled that South Africa does have jurisdiction over the sale of this diamond. He said "Griffiths is from South Africa so South Africa has jurisdiction." This judgment is not based on law -- either South African or international, as the trial-awaiting prisoner Dennis van Kerrebroeck's attorney Nardus Grove proved conclusively in his documentation. Judgment is awaited on April 10 in the Pretoria High Court...
Moreover, for some time now, Canadian and Belgian officals in South Africa and in their home countries have all these documents about this case in their possession which all completely exonerate Dennis van Kerrebroeck from any wrongdoing whatsoever in this matter. Yet still, he sits and waits in Diepsloot prison... 
Why don't the Belgian and Canadian governments get their citizen Dennis van Kerrebroeck released from South African prison?
The question must be asked: If the Canadian and Belgian officials are possession of these documents, why have they not secured Van Kerrebroeck's release from the horrific conditions at Diepsloot trial-awaiting prison, and demand that these charges against him are withdrawn.
Karl Stouthuysen Consul, Consulate General of Belgium Johannesburg, 3rd Floor, 158 Smuts Building, 9 Walters Avenue, Rosebank 2196 Tel: 27 11 912 96 03 Fax: 11 447 54 96
Email: johannesburg@diplobel.fed.be Web: www.diplomatie.be/johannesburg www.diplomatie.belgium.be
1, Roxane de Bilderling, Conseiller, Cabinet du Vice-Premier Ministre, Ministre des Affaires Etrangères, du Commerce Extérieur et des Affaires Européennes, 15 rue des Petits Carmes, 1000 Bruxelles, Tel: +32 2 501 85 54
2. Johan Maricou, Ambassador, Leyds Street 625, Muckleneuk, 0002 Pretoria, 27 12 440 3201 fax: 12 440 3216 Pretoria@diplobel.fed.be
3. Cathie Bruno, Canadian High Commission,1103 Arcadia Street, (Corner Arcadia and Hilda Streets) Hatfield, Pretoria, South Africa 27 82 787 6676 cathie.bruno@international.gc.ca
4. Odette Gaudet-Fee, Gestion cas consulaires-Afrique, Consular Case Management-Africa, Maghreb and Egypt, Foreign Affairs Canada - Affaires étrangères Canada, 125 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, ON K1A 0G2, tel.: 613 992-6540/1 or 800 387-3124 fax/telec 613 996-5358 www.voyage.gc.ca
5. Gaston Barban, High Commissioner to South Africa, 1103 Arcadia Street, (Corner Arcadia and Hilda Streets), Hatfield, Pretoria, South Africa, Tel 27-12 422 3000, Fax 27-12 422 3052, Email: pret@international.gc.ca
6. John Baird, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, 125 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2, Canada, tel 613-995-1851
Mr. Minister Didier Reynders, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and European Affairs Karmelietenstraat 15, 1000 Brussels, Tel.32 2 501 85 91 Fax 32 2 513 25 97 e-mail: @ contact.reynders diplobel.fed.be
sources and links:
United States versus One Polished Diamond Weighing approximately 68 carats'
http://www.allgov.com/news/unusual-news/united-states-sues-a-large-diamond?news=840888
Dennis van Kerrebroeck has had to prove his innocence in SA courts on a charge which did not even occur in South Africa - and still sits in jail:
http://censorbugbear-reports.blogspot.nl/2013/02/fears-for-belgian-businessman-in.html