Netherlands NCP

agentorangechild
Aug 19
4 min read

Updated: Aug 21

Subject: Follow-Up – OECD Complaint: Treaty Breaches, UN Warnings, Insurance Fraud, and ICC Escalation

Dear NCP Secretariat,

I am writing to follow up on my previous communication regarding systemic violations under the OECD Guidelines.

Since my last message, I wish to highlight three critical elements:

Treaty Breaches: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States, and Germany have all failed to implement their binding obligations under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. This failure has directly facilitated inherited chemical harm (TCDD/Agent Orange), constituting ongoing environmental and human rights violations.
United Nations Warnings: Australia alone has received eight formal UN warnings between 2011–2021, issued by multiple treaty bodies (CRPD, CRC, CESCR, CERD, HRC, Human Rights Council, and UN Special Rapporteurs). These warnings repeatedly emphasise second-generation harm, yet no corrective action has been taken. The cumulative record establishes a long-standing pattern of denial and breach of international law.
Insurance Fraud Escalation: This matter has also been formally escalated to the Insurance Giants Lloyd’s of London and Swiss Re, as the underlying treaty breaches and UN warnings were not disclosed when governments and banks obtained cover. This constitutes systematic insurance fraud every year since 2004, with insurers continuing to profit despite full knowledge of ongoing violations.

As stated previously, this case is already before the International Criminal Court under Article 15 of the Rome Statute. The refusal of implicated states to act makes the impartial role of the Dutch NCP essential.

I respectfully request an update on whether your office intends to:

Reconsider jurisdiction based on the ICC nexus, the absence of conflict of interest, and the severity of treaty breaches;
Coordinate with other National Contact Points to ensure these matters are not ignored on procedural grounds.

If your office declines or remains silent, this will be formally documented in Annex D of my ICC submission as further evidence of systemic deflection in the face of war crimes, treaty violations, financial fraud, and organised complicity.

Please confirm your position before the 29th August 2025.

Warm Agent Orange Burns regards,

Danielle Stevens

Australia 🇦🇺

We will always be a child of a Vietnam Veteran

https://agentorangechild.wixsite.com/agent-orange-child

A formal complaint has been lodged with the International Criminal Court for Crimes against Humanity. The final submission was the 1st of July 2025.

Australia ratified International treaties but failed to implement them into domestic laws.

When the United Nations tells you 8+ times you are breaking the law, YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW. Stockholm Convention & Agent Orange is a chemical war crime against children.

Profit before People is a crime.

20/08/2025

Dear Ms. Stevens,

Thank you for your follow-up message and for sharing additional information regarding your notification.

We would like to reiterate that the Dutch NCP’s role and procedures are determined by the OECD Guidelines and the accompanying Procedures. Within this framework:

It is not possible for a notifier to transfer a notification from one NCP to another. The NCP that receives the notification coordinates with other relevant NCPs to determine which is best placed to take the lead.

Alternatively, a notifier may withdraw a notification and submit it to another NCP, after which coordination will again take place between the relevant NCPs.

Having carefully reviewed your submission, we note that the issues you raise relate to impacts and companies outside the Netherlands. As the link with the Netherlands is not apparent, it is unlikely that the Dutch NCP will be in a position to take the lead or assume a supporting role in this matter.

While we acknowledge the seriousness of the concerns you have described, the Dutch NCP can only act within its mandate as outlined in the OECD Guidelines. This means we are not able to reconsider jurisdiction on the grounds you have outlined.

Best regards,

NCP Secretariat

20/08/2025

Dear NCP Secretariat,

Thank you for your response.

I want to be absolutely clear: it is your job, not mine, to coordinate with other NCPs under the OECD Guidelines. The Guidelines specifically require NCPs to decide among themselves which office is best placed to lead. Passing that burden back to me is a breach of your own procedures.

This case is transnational by definition. It involves multinational corporations, insurers, and financial institutions across several jurisdictions. That means it cannot be dismissed simply because you do not see a direct Dutch link. Coordination is required, and the Netherlands NCP is now formally on notice.

By acknowledging the seriousness of the issues, you have confirmed that you are aware of the matter. That makes you part of the record. Even if you decline to take the lead, your inaction will be documented as evidence of failure to coordinate, as required by the OECD Guidelines.

I will not withdraw my notification. The responsibility to coordinate rests with you, not me.