Dutch authorities seize drug criminal’s home to pay cleanup costs of illegal drug lab

In a first for the Dutch justice system, the Public Prosecution Service (OM) has successfully seized the home of a convicted drug criminal to pay for the cleanup of an illegal drug lab, officials confirmed in an exclusive interview with NH Nieuws.

The case involves Krystyn D., one of three men convicted last year for operating a large-scale 4-CMC drug lab in a warehouse on Aalsmeerderweg in Rijsenhout, Noord-Holland. The seizure of his apartment reportedly marks a significant step in recovering costs related to dismantling such illicit operations.

According to OM spokesperson Frank Weijnen, it has been legally possible since 2022 to hold convicted drug criminals financially responsible for cleaning up drug labs and grow operations. However, many offenders lack the funds to cover these expenses, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill. "We can put a price tag on paper, but we must be able to seize assets," Weijnen told NH. "If criminals don’t pay, the taxpayer pays."

The challenge has been the inability to convert valuable possessions—such as villas, Lamborghinis, or Rolex watches—into funds to cover cleanup costs. Weijnen suggested lawmakers overlooked this issue. "We felt the legislator forgot about this," he said.

To circumvent this, the OM sought a legal “workaround” to seize a property belonging to Krystyn D. This apartment, solely in his name and located in the Netherlands, will be auctioned to pay off his share of the cleanup costs.

The illegal lab was uncovered in February 2024 after firefighters responded to reports of smoke near the warehouse. Initially, authorities thought the warehouse was on the same property as a legal cannabis cultivation site being built nearby, but it was later confirmed the lab occupied an adjacent parcel.

Inside, police found over 1,000 kilograms of 4-CMC, a stimulant designer drug popular in Eastern Europe, along with 30,000 liters of raw materials and 50,000 liters of toxic drug waste. Three suspects—Krystyn D., Victor B., and Oleg M.—were arrested.

All three claimed ignorance of the drug production, but prosecutors assert there is sufficient evidence linking them closely to the operation. In October, the prosecutor demanded six-year prison sentences for each and that they jointly pay 300,000 euros for the lab’s cleanup.

The court sentenced them to six years in prison and imposed a cost recovery order of 100,000 euros per defendant. None of the men have the funds to cover their share, but Krystyn D.’s apartment presents an opportunity to recoup at least part of the cleanup costs.

To secure the property seizure, the OM, supported by the government’s legal advisors and asset recovery experts, petitioned the civil court in The Hague. The court ruled in favor of the prosecution, validating the novel legal approach.

Weijnen acknowledged the method as a “trick,” but emphasized it is a legal construction designed to achieve the same goal. “It may sound negative, but it’s a different legal structure we developed to reach the same end.”

The apartment will be auctioned, with over 100,000 euros deducted to cover Krystyn D.’s cleanup costs. Any remaining proceeds will be returned to him, Weijnen told NH. “If there is money left, it will be settled. He has a right to that.”

Krystyn D. can also pay the 100,000 euros by other means, including payment plans. “Not everyone will agree with me, but you can negotiate well with the Central Judicial Collection Agency,” Weijnen noted. Even taking out a loan to save his home is an option. “The key is that the money comes in. That’s the pressure behind it.”

The OM views this new enforcement tool as a win for society. “It’s an additional way to confiscate assets from criminals involved in drug labs and cannabis cultivation.”

Krystyn D. and Victor B. have appealed their convictions, according to a spokesperson from the Amsterdam Court of Appeal. The date for the appeal hearing has not yet been set.

NH contacted Krystyn D.’s attorney, Cem Polat, for comment. Polat declined to elaborate, saying, “It’s possible there is a seizure on my client’s home, but I would need to review the entire case file first.”