> I doubt Dutch judges can rule him guilty for money laundering.

Sensible position given he isn't actually being charged with money laundering.

He is being charged for facilitation and since you're a little sloppy with the facts there will assume that you're not a EU/NL lawyer with expertise in these matters. I know as a layman I will assume that FIOD/Public Prosecutors wouldn't arrest him if they didn't anticipate a successful conviction.

Even if he only created the contract the developer essentially thumbed his nose at the state. That is the kind of "crime" that government takes very seriously. If they want to screw him they will. It's just a question of how thick the veneer of legitimacy on the screwage will be. It's not like this guy has some vocal political minority to back him up so there's not much to stop them.

Building a mixing service that allows people to buy stuff without their employers being able to track it is a legitimate, non-trivial reason.

These mixers are privacy enhancers. Privacy is a general term, and doesn't have to relate to evading the government. If you don't want your employer to know you've bought an NFT from your company's direct competitor, that is a privacy request too.

Except that privacy is not some human right enshrined in law that usurps other laws.

If you facilitate money laundering that is still a crime even if the intent was for legitimate reasons like privacy.

Article 12 of the United Nations's Universal Declaration of Human Rights [0] would like a word.

[0] https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma....

so when are we arresting engineers who built roads and trucks that were used for money laundering?

At least 2013 put probably for much longer.

https://www.wired.com/2013/03/alfred-anaya/

Well, maybe we should start lobbying to make it so.