GGD dug into files BN’ers, OM demands six months in prison | Inland

This became apparent on Tuesday at the criminal trial against Amin L. from Alblasserdam in the court of Utrecht. The Public Prosecution Service demanded six months in prison, three of which were conditional. “He has damaged the confidence of citizens in the GGD and the government. After this leak, the willingness to test declined,” the prosecutor said.

The personal data of De Vries and Van den Heuvel were offered for sale on Telegram at the beginning of this year by a friend of L.. A journalist from RTL Nieuws discovered the data breach, after which the police arrested L. and co-defendant Mohammed Z. (21) from Heiloo. Z. will appear in court on Tuesday afternoon.

The Alblasserdammer told the judges on Tuesday morning that he had “no bad intentions”. He would have looked up the files of the famous Dutch, because they were his idols. “I looked up to them.” He also called Badr Hari’s mobile number, but he did not answer.

L. took photos of four files of celebrities in the CoronIT system and sent them to a friend who asked for them. “I trusted him because he also worked at the GGD. I expected him not to do anything crazy with it.” “I didn’t know it wasn’t allowed,” L. defended himself further. “I had done it for friends before and hadn’t been raped in six months. A lot of photos were shared in GGD app groups, everyone did that.”

The judges referred L. to a signed nondisclosure agreement and a completed privacy course. L: “I didn’t read that statement, because there was a rush. They just wanted you to get to work.”

The officer: “It is inconceivable that he had no idea that this was not allowed. You have to go through and pass training to get started.”

According to his lawyer, it was purely out of curiosity and the GGD itself had “made a mess.” “We shouldn’t make it bigger than it is. If he had worked in a hospital, this would never have been made this big. The warning was a paper tiger.”

GGD GHOR Nederland, the umbrella organization of the regional health services, does not want to respond to the statements of L. and his lawyer as long as the case is still before the court.

Judgment on September 14.

—