A court in Luxembourg, presided by Judge Frederic Mersch, sentenced the couple to remove the article; Corruption in Luxembourg - Part I and to pay € 25.000,- (U.S. $ 32.700,- or approximately NOK 200.000,-) in fines for each day this article remains on the site RettsNorge. The verdict fell sometime in May 2012, which means that the article has been online (continuously published) for 400 days since Mersch handed down his judgement. Let me underline that my live-in has nothing to with the publishing of RettsNorge™.

Euro 10 million in penalties for having published the truth about Danske Bank and Luxembourg
At present the debt or "claim" following the verdict has reached staggering € 10.000.000 - that is 10 million euros, 13 million U.S. dollars, or about NOK 80 million. Within four years the debt will have risen to more than € 60 million, or some half a billion Norwegian kroner.

€25.000,- in daily fines is not only overkill, but also a confirmation that RettsNorge has hit the corrupt bullseye.

To get an understanding of what this is all about, I encourage you to read the article (and its annexes) of which the verdict is based upon. The article is obviously not going to be removed, and the reason is simple enough; it describes the truth, the truth about corruption in the Luxembourg central administration and within its civil service, and the truth about Luxembourg as a giant corrupt financial institution whose main financial goal is to profit on criminal activities around the world. These derailed “democratic penalties” against me and my family for revealing the truth, serves as a telltale sign of corruption and not as a guideline for desired conduct.

As a curiosity, I may mention here that the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, Jean-Claude Juncker (who has been in power longer than most surviving dictators) and his entire government was forced to resign on 11 July 2013, this after a seven hour long questioning in Parliament in regards to an evolving spying and corruption scandal implicating Juncker’s secret services (SREL) and its “service” which consisted of bugging politicians and members of the public (like us), purchasing cars for private use and taking payments and favours in exchange for access to influential officials. For more on in this matter, see this article.

RettsNorge seems to have been the only media on the Internet that has advocated and published evidence of corruption in every part of the state administration in Luxembourg (also involving global organisations as Transparency International, Worldbank, European Investment Bank, IMF and Amnesty International, participating in the cover-up), at least before the Intelligence and corruption scandal exploded internationally this Thursday.

Almost three years ago we informed the Luxembourg Parliament about this corruption scandal. The Parliament refrained from taking any action, although our documentation was solid. The one that assessed our whistleblow is Mayor of Luxembourg today, Xavier Bettel. So, he knew but acted cowardly.

In the light of the present evolving “scandal”, it is actually rewarding to observe that we in fact get a confirmation that we have been on the right track from start. The fact that none of the nation’s or the EU’s institutions responded to our findings, put this case in an even worse light. As the spy-case evolves you will most likely witness that it is by far an internal domestic affair.

My article (and its annexes) which was put on secret trial in Luxembourg in May 2012, describes Danske Bank's criminal activities in Luxembourg. With the annexes I have documented that the bank has corrupted lawyers (including Alex Schmitt), notaries (including Francis Kesseler) and bailiffs (including Martine Lise) as part of their operations, a business which mainly has been carried out to deceive its clients.

In addition we have also documented that the CSSF (Financial Services Authority in Luxembourg), the police, prosecutors and the courts – in addition to lawyers, notaries and bailiffs – not only engaged in Danske Bank’s and other banks’ / financial institutions’ criminal activities in Luxembourg and abroad, but that these public institutions are a necessary component (integrated parts, so to speak) to a crime-protective system of which a bystander would observe as nothing more than the glorious tax haven of Luxembourg. The engagement of these institutions in this crime-protective system is actually a prerequisite for the country’s existence as a financial laundering machine, which in turn is partly the cause to the so called financial crisis. If New-York law firms had been as informed as we are, Luxembourg would be in deep trouble.

The judgment against us is written in French, and has also been sent to us in French (by ordinary mail), just to make it that much harder for us to defend ourselves. The secret judgment was handed down just over two weeks after we were forced to flee from Luxembourg in May 2012. See the article, Corruption in Luxembourg Part IV, to get a vivid picture of why we had to flee to safety.

It seems – as far as we can understand the "judgment" and the level of the daily fines – that Schmitt, Kesseler, Lise and "judge" Mersch weren’t particularly pleased with us publicly reporting on corruption, documenting corruptive activity including their own involvement in this murky business. But this still gives them no right to pursue us.

Since the entire system in Luxembourg could fall if we had succeeded in taking down Schmitt, Kesseler and Lise, it goes without saying that this trio has received assistance from other "stakeholders" – people and institutions who rely on this crime-protective system – and that the decision and the poorly staged criminal hearing against us hence is just part of the fortification of which we have found (and which we have reported on) established as an impenetrable ring around the ongoing financial crimes in this nation.

The Luxembourg Government knows that we are being cheated and deceived by just about everyone, but it also knows that should it give in to our claims then that might be the end of Luxembourg as a Tax Haven and as a provider of financial safe haven for every crook and Harry of the Elite. As for Grand Duke Henri and his puppet-socialists, led by Juncker, there was only one option, and that was to employ all institutions – public as well as private – against us. In addition to the verdict itself, the article-series on corruption in Luxembourg, which rests upon our documents, tape recordings and other evidence that proves corruption, confirm that this was indeed what happened.

We have – in line with thousands of others – been subject to abuse of power of unprecedented dimensions, injustice of which neither Luxembourg or the EU has been the least interested in confirming even stopping. The reason for this passivity is found in the risk of “loosing” Luxembourg as what it is today. Game over. The verdict against us is only a postponement of the inevitable end that this micro-territory will meet sometime soon.

Convicted of having notified the authorities about illegal financial activities in Luxembourg
We have simply been convicted for having told/whistleblowed the truth about Luxembourg as a giant washing machine for blood money and other dishonest valuables, and the truth about the puppets; Schmitt, Kesseler and Lise's involvement in this criminal activity of which Danske Bank has participated in.

The verdict is a direct attack on free speech and an attempt to gag the voice of truth. The decision is also meant to stand as a sharp warning to the thousands of people who have lost all their savings through the criminal activities which banks in Luxembourg carry out, and who might plays with the idea of ​​publishing the facts of their cases, like the hundreds of northern European pensioners in Spain who have lost everything as a result of this activity. See more on www.erva.es. Soon after the pensioners had published parts of their fight on youtube, they were met with the same attack as we did; accusations of libel.

The absurd “verdict” against us, and against an editor, remains as a giant abuse of the judicial system, and of judicial power, carried out by judges – the personification of trust, reliability and independence – who have been instructed to destroy the one who brings the truth and thus protects the criminal business and its growth.

What is worst? Convicted in absentia alive, or dead?
On 12 July 2013 it was announced that a court in Moscow had sentenced the late Russian auditor Mr. Sergei Magnitsky in absentia for tax evasion, and that his boss, Mr. William Browder, has been sentenced to nine years in prison for the same offence, also in absentia.

Some media reports that Magnitsky actually had been convicted in absentia, while other media claims that prosecutors dropped the case against Magnitsky as he had passed away. Nevertheless, as a matter of course one can not press charges or pursue people who are dead or – out of fear for his/her own life – can not attend a court hearing. The reason lies in the banality that such a person does not have a realistic opportunity to defend him-/herself.

The media around the world ask rhetorically whether there could be anything more unfair than being sentenced in absentia, when you're dead (…as a corps has no chance to defend itself, was the mantra), then showing pictures of the empty dock which in fact was not meant for Magnetsky, but rather for Browder. The media surely knows how to play on the ignorance of the masses.

I will claim that it is actually much more unfair to be sentenced in absentia, alive. What could be more unjust than having a government terrorizing a family, threatening them with taking away their child, threatening to kill them, thus forcing them away from their home, their belongings, their friends, their school and local community, away from the country and the continent, then staging a court case, putting together a court full of corrupt judges and then – after instructions from the Grand Duke Henri and his puppets – sentencing the whole family, in absentia, to pay…millions?

This is as real as it gets in the rotten heart of Europe, the EU's founding father. What's so fair about this scheme? And how can the rest of you sit and gaze at the governments and courts of your own country, administering justice at such a level? And by the way: If you intend to criticize other countries' courts – as the West does with Russia today – then you got to be damned sure that you have cleared up in your own backyard first. As far as I can see this has not been done by any of these critics.

For my fellow students, and whoever else I have discussed with after I finished law school, I have campaigned on many dead-and-buried legal issues, among them that Norway is one of the most corrupt countries in the Western world, and that Norwegian judges can be bribed as easily as in any other Western country. A few days ago, Norwegian newspapers published findings from a report carried out by Transparency International, establishing that Norwegian courts are as corrupt as other courts. Up until then Norwegians had been living in a socialist dream, assured that their courts were clean as snow. Although the survey showed that "only" four percent of the users of the courts had acquired illegal services (paid bribes), I am convinced that corruption in the Norwegian judicial system is far more serious than what this study shows. Furthermore, knowing Transparency International, I would go very far in maintaining that this institution is covering up actual facts. Read more about Transparency International in this article; Corruption in Luxembourg Part IV.

The question itself: Have you ever paid bribes to officials in Norwegian courts?, limits or restricts the scope and utility of the study. If the question had been posed differently, e.g; Have you ever, by any dishonest manner, influenced any official at a Norwegian court, TI would most probably have received a much darker and realistic result.

All important figures that have been interviewed in this still hidden Norwegian scandal are puzzled and surprised by the findings. This striking harmony indicates how remote Norwegians live from reality, and how well the socialists have managed to mislead the masses. Lack of knowledge (which the socialists builds their existence on) is the root to much evil, and hence I encourage you all to start educate yourself on your own position as a person, as a proprietor of non-disposable rights and as an equal “operator” in society. I think I can promise you and the community a new life should you choose this option.

Why do EU focus on Russia? It's far worse in its own backyard
In an interview with the BBC yesterday, Browder said that Russia is corrupt, that its government is criminal (which was also stated to the Guardian), that the courts are corrupt, and that everything else is corrupt over there. BBC hails in their own way financier Browder for his fight against corruption, in Russia. Let me add here that Browder is a fund manager and co-founder of the London-based Hermitage Capital Management Fund, a company he had established together with Mr. Edmond Safra, who was killed in a freak incident in his fortress-apartment in Monaco. The Safra-story – and the staged court case following his death, involving the whole corrupt Monegasque administration (link til www.eringerrepport.com er brutt. Les om Robert Eringer og hans problemer med Monaco her) – makes a few books in itself, involving all kinds of shady people, businesses and crimes. Mr. Magnitsky was Hermitage’s Moscow-auditor.

The Russian authorities claims that Hermitage, which Magnitsky represented, was involved in tax evasion on a large scale, which – generally speaking – rather is the rule than the exception at this level of business. The suspicion and accusations of this activity is the basis for the criminal case against the two.

I know too little to say anything about Hermitage and whether its financial activities in Russia could be of the same value as is the case for similar companies doing business in Luxembourg. Having said this, I encourage you to search the web and elsewhere for more information.

Viviane Reding and EU planning sanctions against Russia
These days EU-puppets discuss what to do with the Magnitsky case. But, why this focus on Russia? And why EU?  Why should the world even listen to what the EU intend to do with Russia, when the EU itself and its rotten heart – Luxembourg (Bernard Connolly, the former EU-economist who was suspended and fired from the Commission for having published “Rotten Heart of Europe: The Dirty War for Europe’s Money”, erroneously points at Brussels and not as what he should have done, at Luxembourg) – is as corrupt as it gets?

The EU has since many years now been informed of our case, our investigations and our findings in Luxembourg, and we have asked its different institutions to take action. Despite our serious findings on corruption in Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker’s government (making headlines these days), within the CSSF, within the prosecutors office, within the police, within the legal profession, judges, notaries and even the bailiffs (from hell), the EU has flatly refused to lift a finger to assist us in our work, or at all to “clean up” in Luxembourg. No wonder, perhaps, as the EU’s minister of justice and Human Rights, Viviane Reding, is from a powerful Luxembourg stock.

It is a shame that the West unanimously condemns Russia, when the West's own legal systems are probably far more corrupted and putrefied than the very legal systems they criticize. At least, this is the case if you choose the Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, Monegasque or the Luxembourg legal system as benchmark. These legal systems have at least one thing in common; laws as well as verdicts are passed in the name and/or with the seal of a self-appointed royal dictator.

We have hands on experience of how and what it is like to be a victim of a dictator and a rotten dictatorial medieval legal system, here referring to the above listed legal systems.

The mere fact that Judge Mersch have passed such a “victorious” and absurd verdict against us, only confirms that he is just as corrupt as those he through his judgment has been instructed to protect.

I encourage you all to do whatever is in your power, not only for yourself but also for your neighbours and all the unknowns out there, suffering daily under the corrupt judiciary’s destructive activities. Don’t forget that what has happened to us will most likely happen to you too, that is if you don’t do anything to prevent it.

Have a great and intellectual weekend!

Herman J Berge

In Exile

Nuku’alofa, Tonga