Belgian criminal figure Dikke Nordin continues to challenge the judiciary with persistent recusals, even when absent from court. On 2025-06-24 15:26:00, the Antwerp court postponed his verdict in the high-profile ‘Bommen en Granaten’ case after yet another wrakingsverzoek (recusal request) was filed.
- Dikke Nordin wrakt rechters ondanks verstek
- Proces 'Bommen en Granaten' uitgesteld september
- Rechtbank weigert zich van zaak te onthouden
- Wrakingsverzoek gaat naar hof van beroep
- Dertiende wrakingsverzoek ingediend door E.H.
- Dikke Nordin wacht meerdere drugszaken najaar
Despite the prosecution demanding twelve years in prison and a €100,000 fine, Dikke Nordin’s legal team has repeatedly sought to disqualify judges, marking the thirteenth such attempt. This latest move delays what seemed to be his first conviction in a decade, raising questions about the impact of these tactics on Belgian justice.
What does this mean for the Belgian legal system and public trust? The answer lies ahead as the case unfolds.
Why does Dikke Nordin persist in filing recusals? Is this a tactic to delay justice or a genuine claim of judicial bias? His case underscores the tension between legal strategy and judicial efficiency in Belgium.
- Thirteen recusals filed by Dikke Nordin show a pattern of courtroom disruption.
- The Antwerp court refuses to step aside, maintaining judicial independence.
- The appeal court will soon decide on the validity of the latest recusal.
- Upcoming trials related to drug cases and past violent acts suggest prolonged legal battles.
As the appeal court reviews the recusal request, the Belgian public and legal observers await clarity on how these procedural maneuvers will shape the fight against organised crime. Will the courts uphold their authority, or will delays continue? Stay tuned for further developments.
