DISCRIMINATION

The investigation by POCOB gave itself an objective and non-discriminatory cover, in reality the focus was exclusively on Muslims and Muslim organisations. Representatives of various Islamic organisations were heard in this regard. This exclusive focus on Islam and Muslims is in violation of fundamental human rights, and in particular the non-discrimination principle according to Art. 1 of the Constitution.

The Dutch parliament, without basis or adequate motivation, labeled financial flows to Islamic organisations, such as mosques, as problematic, mainly consisting of donations (zakaat: Islamic obligatory alms tax, where no quid pro quo may be involved) from a list of countries that were also labeled as unfree countries without basis or adequate motivation, namely Morocco, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia.

This was done under the pretext of investigating whether there was undesirable foreign influence through financial flows. An investigation based on unclear terms, suspicion, mistrust, and hostility driven by prejudice rather than legal foundations and human rights. This resulted in a classic witch hunt against Muslims and Islamic organisations. Along with the targeted mosques and institutions, the victims, who were initially called to testify under threat of detention, had to defend themselves as suspects against highly incriminating allegations.

“Not only does the question arise as to why such a heavy-handed instrument was used. The disproportionate instrument used, in which the witnesses were publicly interrogated under oath as suspects, was completely unnecessary. These Muslims were wrongly publicly associated with terrorism, extremism, money laundering, and embezzlement via a livestream and TV channels. They were not heard as witnesses but as suspects and had to defend themselves unprepared without being given the chance to be truly heard,” said lawyer Samira Sabir, who filed the case on behalf of the Ummah Project Foundation. She continues: “At the conclusion of this investigation, a report was issued that offers no room for what the victims have stated, mistrusts the statements of the victims in clear words, and arrived at its conclusions without obtaining findings from the investigation.”