Tous les blogs | Alerter le modérateur| Envoyer à un ami | Créer un Blog


The various layers of (legal) perception

évolution liberté 'Freedom' van Zenos Frudakis

"Freedom" by Zenos Frudakis


La version française se trouve ici


Application no. 17971/11 “Additional information” 17 March 2012 send to the European Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg




In legal terms, the following question is at the centre of this petition:



Was the tax assessment of income on interest in the 2007 corporation tax assessment justified?




Looking merely at the 1969 Dutch Corporation Tax Act, this tax assessment was fully justified. All involved, including myself, agree on this. In addition, the Netherlands court of appeal has indicated that relevant rulings of the European Court of Human Rights also premise that money is worth money in the form of interest.


Legally speaking, the Dutch proceedings were not really viable because the court is not permitted to test the corporation tax law against the constitution. For me this means that the essential separation of powers does not exist in the Netherlands, so that an independent administration of justice is virtually impossible. It is also important to note that the premise that money is worth money has become self-evident and is in fact embedded in the DNA of our politico-economic system and hence to an important degree also in people themselves. Calling this into question then feels like overthrowing the current system. It is important in this regard to note that it is precisely this artificial overthrowing of the system that I am actually attempting to call into question. ;-) This is a difficult paradox that emerges from this petition and for which we must make room in order to examine and assess this without prejudice. For me, rashly granting this petition would be just as disastrous as simply ignoring it.


This petition is attempting to uncover the injustice of the system of which we are all a part. It is therefore not directed against the Dutch state but against the system to which we have subjected ourselves, including the government. It is not about the question of who is to blame but about awakening the system in which we currently live. Only then will constructive and sustainable change be possible.



A society is based on agreements. One of these agreements is how our monetary system works.              


Exemple I

....Money exists not by nature but by law” (Aristotle, Ethics 1133)



Economists study the consequences of this agreement and base their scientific observations on it. A philosopher is someone who asks questions, and, in the proces sooner or later examines the agreement made and may bring it up for discussion. Economists do not readily do this, since it could expose the very basis of the science of economics to scrutiny, and the science may turn out not to be a science, but only a temporary assumption or agreement. .



Source: The political-economic Decoy, page 19, March 2004.




Lire la suite