A Dutch educational and media pundit specialising in company governance and integrity has misplaced his college and authorities watchdog roles after it emerged that he had knowingly gone into enterprise with a convicted fraudster.
Jaap Koelewijn, who wrote a column in a Dutch newspaper and usually appeared on TV and radio, had employed a person named solely as Michel G, who served a 10-month jail sentence for monetary fraud, to work at his two funding funds underneath a false title.
A second man, who’s at the moment dealing with fraud costs, was additionally discovered to be performing as a authorized adviser to one of many firms.
The revelations made by the Het Financieele Dagblad newspaper have been all of the extra shocking on condition that Koelewijn had commented within the media on the multimillion-euro fraud dedicated by Michel G on the time of his arrest in 2012.
When confronted by the Dutch newspaper, Koelewijn mentioned he was giving him “a second probability”.
In response to the event, the Nyenrode Enterprise College mentioned they’d not make use of Koelewijn as a professor. He has misplaced his place as a board member on the pension fund of the Netherlands Authority for the Monetary Markets. The true property funding fund Synvest, the place Koelewijn was an adviser, mentioned they have been additionally chopping ties.
Koelewijn has been a regulator contributor to Dutch TV and radio reveals, on which he has mentioned his coverage when advising firms is to ask: “How can fraud be completed right here?”
A spokesman for Koelewijn mentioned the educational now accepted that he had made an error.
“Mr Koelewijn accepted the place of an worker, who up to now had been involved with the judiciary, at two funding funds have been he’s concerned in, on the idea that everybody in life deserves to have a second probability,” the spokesman mentioned.
“Each funds had all needed compliance measures in place, the worker by no means had entry to the administration or finance, however purely executed a industrial position. Mr Koelewijn admits that his reasoning for giving this worker a second probability is a miscalculation. The worker is not concerned on the funds.”