Deutschüber gleiches Thema auf Deutsch

Walter Keim, Email: walter.keim@gmail.com
Torshaugv. 2 C
N-7020 Trondheim, 20. November 2005

Human Rights Committee c/o OHCHR-UNOG,
Petition Team
United Nations Office 
8-14 avenue de la Paix 
CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Fax. No. (41-22) 917 9022

Complaint Freedom of Information 19. Oct. 2005

 
Sir,

I refer to my complaint 19. Oct. 2005 asking the Centre for Human Rights of the United Nations to process this individual complaint according to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) with documentation that I was the victim of several refusals of access to documents1 :

I am the victim of an additional refusal of access to documents:

At Sant’ Anna die Stazzema, 560 women, children and men, unable to flee, were murdered in a bestial manner by SS troops10. In Italy 10 SS murderers where sentenced to jail for lifetime for war crimes committed 12. August 1944 in Sant´Anna more than 60 years ago. But Germany does not extradite them to Italy. Public prosecutor Gernot Blessing in Stuttgart/Germany is not prosecuting them up to now. Therefore a sentence in Germany is hindered. The families of the victims are denied access to documents.

The Doctors Chamber in Nordwürttemberg has hired Gernot Blessing9 to prosecute doctors who do not do their duties to respect patients rights. A complaint was filed because access to documents was denied, violating Section 406e (5) StPO (Strafprozeßordnung: Code of Criminal Procedure) on Inspection of files and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). My complaint was not5 dealt with for 2 years11. The doctors chamber has chosen him. I asked: Is he is the right person to do the job?9. He is no good choice from a patients' rights view.

In addition I have now got the bill of the administrative court in Berlin7, which is € 770.- for a case on access to documents (and 15 copies) and a fair answer to petitions ! This is normally free in the European "area of freedom, security and justice" with a "guarantee for the principles of democracy and respect for human rights".


Domestic juridical/administrative remedies have been tried and it is shown that remedies are ineffective:

I contacted the "Robin Hood" of German justice system 19. October 20033. He estimated an amount of controversy of € 4000.- and costs of approx. € 2180.- for both lower and higher administrative court, because a defeat was sure.

Already the first judgement of the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) Berlin 25. April 2005 shows that juridical remedies are ineffective. The sentence says that there is no legal basis even to ask for access of documents, i. e. the ICCPR is totally ignored.

During the proceedings at the administrative court documents of the Petition on Human Rights Violations in Germany: Invitation of the Human Rights Commissioner 8 where available, showing that German authorities are human rights phobic. The term "human rights" is never used in their files. Access to these documents cost approx. € 770.- (see account of the court 27. October 2005 on the basis of amount of controversy € 12,000.-) because the case was lost totally. That corresponds to approx. 38 days in jail asking for access to documents (which is a UN human right) and a fair answer within reasonable time (which is a fundamental right in the EU Charter of basic rights). That shows how German courts defend the old-fashioned authoritarian state by high costs. The costs of the this lower administrative court are € 770.- see account of the court 27. October 2005.

The second lawyer I contacted4 after having lost the first round could only promise me a defeat. The higher administrative court the costs to pay him and the court would have been more than € 2.607,65 in addition plus costs for travelling (i. e. corresponding approx. 130 days in jail, see http://www.prozesskostenrechner.de/) on the basis of an  amount of controversy of € 12,000.- At the higher administrative court a complainant must have a lawyer.

High costs unreasonably high barrier to justice restricting direct participation according to ICCPR Article 25: "Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions: (a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly". The higher administrative court did not remove this barrier and the Constitutional Court did not find it unconstitutional.

Summary

I refer to the website of the UN: http://www.runiceurope.org/german/menschen/udhr_template.htm. It says (translated from German):
 

"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) gives in clear and simple language the basic rights which everybody is entitled to.

You can claim these basic rights. These rights are your rights.

Make yourself familiar with them. Help to promote and defend these basic rights for yourself and your fellows"

PREAMBLE

Article 2 paragraph 2 and 3 of the ICCPR binds states and gives citizens rights for remedies:

2. Where not already provided for by existing legislative or other measures, each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take the necessary steps, in accordance with its constitutional processes and with the provisions of the present Covenant, to adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights recognized in the present Covenant.

3. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:

(a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;

Germany violates its obligation to adopt laws and gives no remedies.

To sum up one must say that Germany abuses it's sovereignty to deny me and other Germans the human right of freedom of information. Therefore I am as German a second class citizens in the EU and Europe. Even worth: EU citizens, who move to Germany loose the human right of freedom of information, which they had in the country they come from. The mothers and fathers of the wrote they were "animated by the purpose to serve world peace as an equal part in a unified Europe," (Preamble Basic Law), not the continuation of authoritan pieces (as the only country in Europe): The "Amtsgeheimnis" (official secrecy) as relict of Prussian authorial state, which puts secrecy higher than democratic participation and human rights of citizens.

This complaint is published here: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/un-051120.htm.

Yours sincerely,


Walter Keim
Torshaugv. 2 C
N-7020 Trondheim
E-Mail: walter.keim@gmail.com
Human Right violations in Germany: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/de_human_rights.htm
Support Freedom of Information: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/foil.htm#e-mail
Support Patients' Rights: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/patients.htm#e-mail

Copy: OHCHR-UNOG G/SO 215/51 GERM ES, EU Commission, EU Parliament, EU Council, Council of Europe, OSCE, OECD and UN

Result:

List of appendices:

  1.  Constitutional Complaint: Right to petitions and Freedom of Information  (Aktenzeichen: 1 BvR 1057/02): Denial of Access to documents: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/v-klage_en.htm
  2. Case: LBGÄ Nr. 02/05: Letter of 11. November 2005: Denial of Access to documents: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/0511labw-en.htm
  3. Letter to "Robin Hood" of German justice system 19. October 2003: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/vg-031019.htm
  4. Letter to second lawyer 10 May 2005: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/vg-050510.htm
  5. Constitutional complaint of 3. November 2005: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/lbgae-bvg-051103.htm
  6. EU send the UN-complaint to ECHR: 15. Oct. 2005: Application for communication in English language
  7. Costs: Case VG 2 A 85.04: Walter Keim vs. Federal Republic of Germany: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/vg-051112-en.htm
  8. Petition Human Rights Violations in Germany: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/petition_me-en.htm
  9. Doctors court prosecutor Gernot Blessing: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/blessing-en.htm 
  10. German war crimes in Italy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sant'Anna_di_Stazzema, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/germ-o07.shtml and http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/s/sa/santanna_di_stazzema2.htm   
  11.  Beschwerde Berufsaufsicht Dr. med. (...):  http://wkeim.bplaced.net/020322ab.htm
  12. Acces to the reason of not implenemting the suggestions of the Human Rights Commissioner this decision was denied:  http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/petition_ba-m.htm#einsicht
  13. Denial of access to documents Petition Freedom of Information 21. Dec. 2001 to Bundestag: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/petition_ifg.htm#einsicht
  14. Denial of access to documents Petition Freedom of Information 20. Dec. 2001 to Landtag Baden-Württemberg (Appendix: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/petition_bw.htm#einsicht
  15. Denial of access to documents of petition Patients Rights 25. Oct. 2001 to Bundestag (Appendix: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/petition4.htm#einsicht
  16. Keim v. Germany(II) ECHR Appl. No. 31583/07 access to income of MPs sideline jobbs [Appendix: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/egmr-klage-en.htm
  17. Denial of access to documents of petition 13/824 of 20. October 2001 to Landtag Baden-Württemberg: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/petition3_p2.pdf
  18. Keim v. Germany(III) ECHR Appl. No. 46953/09 access to income of MPs sideline jobbs: http://wkeim.bplaced.net/files/egmr-0908.htm

This publication is a hearing: Please send comments to: walter.keim@gmail.com

Warning: I do not accept any liability that the information on these pages is correct, accurate or up to date!

Please feel free to link this site!

Visitor No. since 18. November 2003

[Petitions]     [Human Right Violations]    [Freedom of Information]     [Homepage]  

Picture: Dark green: Law in effect. Bright green: Freedom of information in constitution only. Yellow: Pending law. FOIA= Freedom of Information Act

Informationsfreiheitgesetze in EuropaInformationsfreiheit in Europa