7/17/2020
ECLI:NL:PHR:2019:592, Parket bij de Hoge Raad, 17/03392
[betrokkene 1] (Hof: [betrokkene 1] ) and I went to the office of [betrokkene 2] in Point Blanche. [...] It was in the
afternoon. [...] We got to speak to [medeverdachte 1] . We went into his office. He took all of our information. He
told us that he would have gotten back to us in due time.
On the 16th of September 2010 [medeverdachte 1] called me. He told me to come to the office [...] and that he
would have something for me. [...] I went to the office [...]. Both times I went to [betrokkene 2] ’s office, I went
with a police patrol vehicle. [...] When I got into [medeverdachte 1] ’s office he told me that he had something for
us. He said that the money was not all that we asked for, but that we would get the rest after the election. He gave
me a dummy voting ballot with something wrapped in it with an elastic band around it. I put [it] in my [pants]
pocket. I did not check until I reached the police station. When I got to the station I checked the package that
[medeverdachte 1] gave me. I saw that I only got three envelopes and not four as I thought. [medeverdachte 4]
was working at that moment. I am not sure if [medeverdachte 3] was working. [...] I gave [medeverdachte 4] two
envelopes, one for him and one for [medeverdachte 3] . [betrokkene 1] was not at the balie at that time. I gave
[medeverdachte 4] the envelopes in the police station Philipsburg by the balie (frontdesk). [...] I received three
hundred dollars ($ 300) from in the envelop. ”
4. De verdachte heeft op 7 september 2012 ten overstaan van de politie het volgende verklaard:
“I was [involved in the United People Party during the election of 2010]. [...]! was [...] accountable to [betrokkene
2] . He was the party leader. [...]
I knew [medeverdachte 2] from back in the days and he came by me with his financial needs and so did the officers
that accompanied him that day. [...] They came [at the office of [betrokkene 2] in Point Blanche] for financial help.
[...] I met them at the first floor in the back area. In a closed office. [...] The information [that I took] [...] is the
financial aid that they were looking for. [...] I told them let me see what I can do for you, if I can help you all out or
not. [...] We asked [people] where they live, address, and try to convince them to vote for the UP Party. [...] The
purpose of taking the information [was] [...] to see if they were registered in the voting system and if they were
eligible to vote. [...] On the 16th of September 2010, [...] I [indeed] did call [ [medeverdachte 2] ] from my
cellular phone on the number that he gave me from his first visit to my office. [...] [medeverdachte 2] arrived [...]
late in the morning [by the office]. Just before lunch time. [...] I gave [medeverdachte 2] three envelops each
containing [...] money [...]. ”
5. [betrokkene 3] , die de United People Party gedurende de verkiezingstijd in 2010 onder andere hielp met het
uitdelen van petjes en flyers, heeft over het kantoor in Point Blanche het volgende verklaard:
“We used it for registering people mainly. [...] They had to present their passport to see if they were registered on
the island and if they were eligible to vote and how much members were in their family and if they were also able
to vote. [...] The main reason is to make sure that people has the right to vote. We collected data to make a
database to see if they were registered and to see how big the family is. The party will then lobby with them. ”
6. [medeverdachte 2] , [medeverdachte 3] , [medeverdachte 4] en [betrokkene 1] waren kiesgerechtigd voor de
verkiezing op 17 september 2010. Zij waren indertijd ouder dan 18 jaar, hadden de Nederlandse nationaliteit en
waren ingeschreven in de Sint Maartense Basisadministratie. Het kiesrecht was hen niet ontzegd.”
6. Voorts bevat het vonnis als bewijsoverweging het volgende:
“De raadsman heeft ter terechtzitting in hoger beroep, bij wijze van een subsidiair standpunt, bepleit dat de
verdachte opnieuw van de gehele tenlastelegging zal worden vrijgesproken. Daartoe heeft hij aangevoerd dat het
bewijst tekortschiet om te kunnen vaststellen dat door of namens de verdachte de voorwaarde is gesteld dat de
medeverdachten op de United People Party zouden moeten stemmen. De verdachte heeft geen voorwaarde gesteld.
Hij is een niet onvermogend man en helpt mensen voor, tijdens en na de verkiezingen. Op de dag van de
verkiezingen koopt hij bijvoorbeeld, net als vele anderen, veel eten en drinken voor willekeurige mensen die hij
helemaal niet kent. Het is een fenomeen dat van alle tijden is en zich op en rond alle politieke partijen voordoet.
Dat van ‘vote buying’ sprake is geweest, kan niet worden bewezen, aldus de raadsman.
Het Hof overweegt als volgt.
https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:PHR:2019:592&showbutton=true&keyword=verkiezingen
3/8