A consultation with the government, society and myself.

Is it possible today to put on trial the principal political-economic logic, or do we 'only' need to find a democratic majority, whether it is true or false?



- Press release -

Four years ago (in 2006) I entered into a dialogue with the public authorities (and the constitutional state.) The Supreme Court decision has now formally ended this dialogue.

The essence of what I have tried to put forward is that, as a result of mutual competition, the authorities have chosen to side with:


the winners

As a consequence, the authorities have lost any and all independence to talk and act on behalf of the people. The assumption that money is worth money in the form of interest has even prompted the government to designate the winner in advance:


the financial world,
the source of the unchecked bureaucracy.


As a result, the economy, democracy, the constitutional state, reason and integration have ultimately become subservient to the bureaucratic patterns that we ourselves have institutionalised. Over time, these patterns have created a wall of apartheid in the human psyche, stronger than the Berlin wall. This wall has increasingly alienated us from our common basis,
which, in legal terms, is our constitution and, in political terms, the public interest. It is through this that we have cut ourselves off from ‘the other’ and, hence, from ourselves.

When we have the courage to face up to this, that wall in our psyche will melt like snow in summer.


To be continued

De Hutte Holding BV, Peter Hoopman, 27 September 2010

translated by Language Unlimited (only the press release)




Juridical procedure
 
 
Service de contributions
The trial
Notice of Objection february 2007
Notice of objection april 2007
 
Judgement tribunual Arnhem in zake hoger beroep
Only in dutch for the moment
Commanding Hights
 
Silvio Gesell and the free money experiment in Wörgl
 
Response of the director-general of the national tax office
4 march 2010
 
 
Appeal to Supreme court 20 march 2010
Was Adam Smith wrong?
 
Judgement by the dutch Supreme Court
17 september 2010
 
     
New: March 2011, Application send to the European Court of Human Rights at Strassbourg France


   
     
  Four letters translated in English for the moment     Brief aan de belastingsdienst 28 februari 2005
  First letter to Dutch Prime-Minister
2 may 2006
     
  Antwoord Minister-President
22 mei 2006
       
  Second letter to Minister-President
9 juni 2006
Brief gericht aan de Hoge Raad
11 juni 2006
Brief gericht aan de Tweede Kamer
9 juni 2006
Brief aan Belastingdienst
11 juni 2006
 
  Antwoord op tweede brief van de Minister-President 5 juli 2006 Antwoord Hoge Raad 12 juli 2006 Antwoord Tweede Kamer Commissie voor Economische Zaken
6 september 2006
 
  Derde brief aan Minister-President
11 juli 2006
Tweede brief aan Hoge Raad
18 juli 2006
     
  Antwoord op derde brief door de Minister-President 14 augustus 2006 Antwoord op tweede brief door de Hoge Raad 17 augustus 2006    
    Third letter to dutch Supreme Court
The difference between legal system and Constitutional State 13 september 2006
  Letter to Tax ad Customs administration
Among believers
6 november 2006

 
  Antwoord van Minister-President op een kopie van een brief aan de belastingsdienst. 23 november 2006 Antwoord op derde brief door de Hoge Raad 2 november 2006    
 
 
 
A few questions to deepen the democratic-economic debate. Back to index page