In his money laundering case, Didier Reynders is not the only one in turmoil

The date was not a coincidence. Two days earlier, Didier Reynders had lost his immunity as European commissioner, which meant that justice should not inform the European Commission of the search carried out at his home. There is no doubt that federal police investigators have heard the former minister at length on this issue and are carrying out checks. The public prosecutor’s office refuses to make any comments.

Who is André Renette, Didier Reynders’ lawyer since he was targeted by an investigation for money laundering?

For his part, Didier Reynders remains silent. Three days later, his lawyer, Me André Renette, limited himself to a short communication at the beginning of December in which he contested the classification of money laundering.both in fact and in law” and indicates that Mr. Reynders “will provide the magistrate in charge of the case with useful explanations relating to the management of his private assets”.

Didier Reynders, who, to our knowledge, has not been charged, will not be able to avoid the question of the origin of the money. In matters of money laundering, the burden of proof does not fall on the public prosecutor. This must not provide proof of the illicit origin of the money but, more simply, the absence of legal origin of the money.

To our knowledge, Mr. Reynders or his wife, a former magistrate, have not been heard again since this first hearing on this million euros. But there is no doubt that they will be heard again, without a delay being planned.

This million breaks down as follows: 800,000 euros deposited over ten years by Mr. Reynders into his bank account and 200,000 euros spent on the purchase of lottery tickets from 2018 at a Texaco service station in Uccle, sometimes via cash purchases of 3,000 euros, revealed on Friday The evening.

“Few people knew about it” given the identity of the case detected: the Lottery justifies itself and clarifies its actions in the Reynders affair

A passive bank?

The timing also raises questions about the role of Mr. Reynders’ bank. ING bank, reports The eveningquestioned Mr. Reynders’ numerous cash deposits in 2018. She questioned her client about this and the latter then allegedly stopped his cash deposits. But ING did not then make a declaration of suspicion to the Financial Information Processing Center (CTIF), whereas banking institutions are required to do so in the event of suspicion.

Didier Reynders suspected of money laundering: ING bank in the crosshairs

ING will not denounce the facts until 2023, that is to say one year after the public prosecutor’s office opened an investigation. This is all the more surprising given that banking institutions are required to exercise increased vigilance towards “politically exposed persons”towards whom they must exercise increased vigilance due to their functions. What led, wrote The eveningthe National Bank of Belgium (BNB) to open an investigation into ING regarding its treatment of client Reynders.