O Tribunal Distrital dos Países Baixos Centrais rejeitou o pedido da organização de bloquear a publicação do relatório de Utrecht, entendendo que o interesse público no relatório superava suas objeções “também porque essas objeções são em grande parte incorretas”; o Tribunal de Apelação de Arnhem-Leeuwarden rejeitou o recurso em agosto de 2020.

Claim ID claim-safeguarding-dutch-court-refused-publication-banConcerns 23 de janeiro de 2020Resultado

Resultado · 23 de janeiro de 2020 Verificado

O Tribunal Distrital dos Países Baixos Centrais rejeitou o pedido da organização de bloquear a publicação do relatório de Utrecht, entendendo que o interesse público no relatório superava suas objeções “também porque essas objeções são em grande parte incorretas”; o Tribunal de Apelação de Arnhem-Leeuwarden rejeitou o recurso em agosto de 2020. Source: Rechtbank Midden-Nederland (District Court of Central Netherlands), voorzieningenrechter, 23 de janeiro de 2020 Source: Universiteit Utrecht nieuws, 10 de agosto de 2020 Source: DutchNews.nl, 5 de agosto de 2020

Mostrar as provas (3 fontes)

Registro público oficial Verificado

Rechtbank Midden-Nederland (District Court of Central Netherlands), voorzieningenrechter, “Christelijke Gemeente van Jehovah's Getuigen Nederland c.s. v Universiteit Utrecht and the State, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2020:227 (kort geding, C/16/495765 / KG ZA 20-25)”

23 de janeiro de 2020 · Section 4 'De beslissing', 4.1-4.2 · mr. R.A. Steenbergen (voorzieningenrechter) · Raad voor de Rechtspraak (open data)

“Juridisch gezien ligt de drempel voor een publicatieverbod hoog. Het belang dat met het rapport gediend wordt, weegt zwaarder dan de bezwaren van de Jehovah's Getuigen, ook omdat die bezwaren voor een belangrijk deel onjuist zijn.”

(Gloss: Legally the threshold for a publication ban is high. The interest served by the report outweighs the Jehovah's Witnesses' objections, also because those objections are largely incorrect.) The Jehovah's Witnesses sought to prevent publication of the WODC/Utrecht report on the day it was due to be released; the court 'wijst de vorderingen af' (dismissed the claims) and ordered them to pay costs. An appeal was rejected by the Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwarden in August 2020.

Fonte oficial (abre em nova aba) Cópia arquivada ou alternativa (abre em nova aba)

Nota de procedência e verificação

Nota de confiança. Full judgment XML retrieved from the Rechtspraak open-data endpoint; quotations verbatim.

Corroborado por. src-uu-2020-0810-appeal-news, src-dutchnews-2020-0805-report-stays-online

Notes. Oral ruling of 23 January 2020 after a hearing on 22 January 2020.

Consultado em. 19 de setembro de 2026 · Identificador da fonte. src-rbmne-2020-0123-kort-geding

Revisado por pares / acadêmico Verificado

Universiteit Utrecht nieuws, “Onderzoeksrapport over misbruik binnen gemeenschap Jehova's getuigen blijft openbaar, ook na hoger beroep”

10 de agosto de 2020 · Universiteit Utrecht

“Het rapport volgt uit gedegen, genuanceerd wetenschappelijk onderzoek en is getoetst door een wetenschappelijke begeleidingscommissie.”

(Gloss: the report follows from thorough, nuanced scientific research and was reviewed by a scientific supervisory committee.) The university records that the Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwarden rejected the Jehovah's Witnesses' appeal against publication (decision reported as 4 August 2020 in legal databases).

Fonte oficial (abre em nova aba)

Nota de procedência e verificação

Nota de confiança. Page opened; quotation confirmed.

Corroborado por. src-rbmne-2020-0123-kort-geding, src-dutchnews-2020-0805-report-stays-online

Consultado em. 19 de setembro de 2026 · Identificador da fonte. src-uu-2020-0810-appeal-news

Jornalismo de reputação estabelecida Verificado

DutchNews.nl, “Jehovah's Witness sexual abuse report can stay online, judge rules”

5 de agosto de 2020 · DutchNews.nl

“the government is guilty of discrimination because it is focusing solely on one religious community”

The organisation's position as reported. The article gives the report's figures (751 reports; 292 from victims themselves) and notes the organisation said it had provided pastoral care for years but had not implemented the recommended 'central internal independent hotline'.

Fonte oficial (abre em nova aba)

Nota de procedência e verificação

Nota de confiança. Article opened.

Corroborado por. src-uu-2020-0810-appeal-news

Notes. Reporting-tier; use for the organisation's stated response only.

Consultado em. 19 de setembro de 2026 · Identificador da fonte. src-dutchnews-2020-0805-report-stays-online

Página da afirmação Corrigir ou atualizar

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/pt-br/evidence/claim-safeguarding-dutch-court-refused-publication-ban/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.

A afirmação e as suas provas

Rechtbank Midden-Nederland (District Court of Central Netherlands), voorzieningenrechter, “Christelijke Gemeente van Jehovah's Getuigen Nederland c.s. v Universiteit Utrecht and the State, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2020:227 (kort geding, C/16/495765 / KG ZA 20-25)”

Universiteit Utrecht nieuws, “Onderzoeksrapport over misbruik binnen gemeenschap Jehova's getuigen blijft openbaar, ook na hoger beroep”

DutchNews.nl, “Jehovah's Witness sexual abuse report can stay online, judge rules”