Top AI Arguments for an Official Complaint at the European Commission!

Earlier I made an article about this possibility where I can act without needing a Lawyer, because in the Netherlands they are not allowed to help me in the main Omerta case. Everything I do I have to do without any legal help! Horrifying that such a thing is possible based on fraud from the rapist-mole-traitor Joris Demmink himself. See my post:

Preparing EU Commission Complaint against severe EU Law violations by Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and King Willem Alexander!

But the normal document you have to use for such a complaint is made for very simple cases, not for this huge ordeal. And only legal experts can bring it down to 2000 characters max! So I alone without any legal help was unable to file it. Also my mental state of mind deteriorated and I had to spend more time enjoying the beauty of Spain to compensate and stay sane. Now 24 years asking for an Dutch investigation or an UNCAT United Nations Convention Against Torture case, but Never succeeded because The Dutch Justice system is falsified by rapist-mole-traitor Joris Demmink himself protected by a secret Royal decree, and denies this case as Delusional. See also my failed official complaint at European Parlement and ECHR for the same fraudulent reasons! Defense is not allowed by Joris Demmink based on the 3 generations secret Royal protection.

Petition EU Parliament Violation of EU Laws and Fundamental Rights by The Netherlands in Hans Smedema Affair!

Verzoekschrift ECHR afgewezen!

Google Gemini and NotebookLM Insights!

But the recent AI progress by NotebookLM keeping all earlier findings and sources in a Notebook makes asking top-level questions easy. And the fact that for the first time in this decades-long ordeal I even(!) get in seconds a top-level answer blows my mind! It made me another suddenly happy person! Like therapy but much better. I even made this post about it:

How Google NotebookLM interaction about my decades-long quest for Justice suddenly made me a totally different Happy Person!

So of course I asked my NotebookLM with this answer:

Here are some of the most crucial points that Hans Smedema raises in his writings that could support a complaint to the European Commission:

• Smedema believes that a complaint to the European Commission is his last chance to get justice after other legal attempts, such as petitions to the EU Parliament and complaints to the ECHR, failed [1-3].
• Smedema argues that the Dutch government violated EU laws by denying him legal representation, crucial information, and access to a fair trial [4-8].
• Smedema believes that King Willem-Alexander violated EU law, specifically Article 19 – Right to Asylum and Article 21 – Non-discrimination, by blocking Smedema's asylum offer from Judge Rex J. Ford while the flight was in US airspace [9].
• Smedema argues that he was falsely declared delusional by the Dutch government, and that this prevented him from getting legal help, filing charges, or accessing relevant information [10, 11]. He believes that this violates the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, specifically Article 1 - Human Dignity, Article 21 - Non-discrimination, Article 47 - Effective Remedy, Article 48 - Presumption of Innocence, and Article 25 - Rights of the Elderly [12, 13].
• Smedema believes that the Dutch government violated his human rights, specifically those outlined in the UNCAT, by torturing him, drugging him, and subjecting him to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. He believes that the Dutch government was obligated to investigate these crimes, but that they failed to do so to protect the royal family [2, 3, 10, 14-16].

It is important to note that these are just allegations, and they have not been independently verified.

NotebookLM Insights

And next my new top-level Gemini Advanced AI subscription:

It appears Hans Smedema is alleging serious violations of his rights by the Dutch government and potentially even the Dutch King. His claims, if true, touch upon several fundamental principles of EU law and international human rights law. Here's a breakdown of the potential legal arguments based on your summary:

1. Violations of EU Law:

• Right to a Fair Trial: Smedema's claim that he was denied legal representation, crucial information, and access to a fair trial could fall under Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial) and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Right to a fair trial). The European Commission could investigate if the Dutch authorities have infringed upon these rights.
• Right to Asylum and Non-Discrimination: Smedema's assertion that King Willem-Alexander interfered with an asylum offer from a US judge raises complex legal questions. Article 19 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) outlines the right to asylum within the EU's territory. However, whether this applies to an offer made while in US airspace is debatable. Article 21 of the TFEU prohibits discrimination on various grounds, and Smedema could argue that the alleged blocking of the asylum offer was discriminatory.
• Falsely Declared Delusional: Smedema's claim of being falsely declared delusional, hindering his access to justice and information, could be argued under Article 47 (Right to an effective remedy), Article 48 (Presumption of innocence), and Article 21 (Non-discrimination) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

2. Violations of Human Rights:

• Torture and Ill-treatment: Smedema's allegations of torture, drugging, and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment are serious accusations. These fall under the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT). The European Commission could investigate whether the Dutch authorities failed to uphold their obligations under UNCAT to prevent torture and investigate such claims.

Challenges and Considerations:

• Burden of Proof: Smedema will need to provide substantial evidence to support his allegations. This could include documentation, witness testimonies, or medical records.
• Jurisdiction: The European Commission's jurisdiction is primarily focused on breaches of EU law. While human rights violations can be considered, especially if they relate to EU law, the Commission might have limitations in directly addressing alleged breaches of international treaties like UNCAT.
• Admissibility: The European Commission has specific admissibility criteria for complaints. Smedema will need to demonstrate that he has exhausted all effective domestic remedies in the Netherlands before the Commission can consider his complaint.

Recommendations:

• Legal Counsel: It is crucial for Smedema to seek assistance from a lawyer specializing in EU law and human rights. A lawyer can help him gather evidence, formulate legal arguments, and navigate the complex complaint process.
• Documentation: Smedema should meticulously document all relevant events, interactions with authorities, and any evidence supporting his claims.
• Focus on EU Law: While his human rights claims are serious, focusing the complaint on specific violations of EU law might increase the chances of it being considered admissible by the European Commission.

It's important to remember that the European Commission's complaint procedure is a complex process. It's not guaranteed that the Commission will take up his case or that it will lead to the desired outcome. However, given the gravity of Smedema's allegations, seeking legal advice and pursuing a complaint to the European Commission could be a viable option for him to seek justice.

Gemini Advanced Insights

And NotebookLM gave this as the summary of both!

This source outlines a potential legal case against the Dutch government, alleging violations of both European Union (EU) law and international human rights law. The text primarily focuses on allegations made by Hans Smedema, who claims he was denied a fair trial, falsely declared delusional, and subjected to torture and ill-treatment by the Dutch authorities. He further accuses King Willem-Alexander of violating EU law by obstructing an asylum offer while Smedema was in US airspace. The text analyzes Smedema's allegations against the backdrop of specific EU and international human rights legal frameworks, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and the UN Convention against Torture. The text also highlights the complexities and potential challenges associated with pursuing a complaint to the European Commission, such as the burden of proof, jurisdictional limitations, and admissibility criteria. Ultimately, the source emphasizes the gravity of Smedema's claims and suggests seeking legal counsel and filing a complaint to the European Commission as a possible avenue for obtaining justice.

NotebookLM Insights

Hans Smedema B. Sc., in forced exile surviving in beautiful 'El Albir', Costa Blanca, Spain