“A person’s right to free expression is protected not in order to protect him, …

Quoting philosopher Joseph Raz, the majority acknowledged that freedom of expression exists to protect speech on the fringes, not mainstream acceptability:

“A person’s right to free expression is protected not in order to protect him, but in order to protect a public good, a benefit which respect for the right of free expression brings to all those who live in the society in which it is respected, even those who have no personal interest in their own freedom.”

From ‘Laughter Up North‘. Sums up this blog’s position on free speech.

AG München, Art. 6 MRK dispensabel?

F A X

Amtsgericht München
80097 München
Fax: 5597-4161

cc BMJV, BMAS, SG, LSG, BSG, ECRI

16. Aug. 2021

Az. 845 Ds 259 Js 153060/20

Beschwerde

Ich lege Beschwerde ein gegen den Beschluss des Richters Müller vom 05. Aug. 2021, förmlich zugestellt am 10. Aug. 2021. Meine Beschwerde gemäss § 311 Abs. 3 StPO ist damit fristgerecht.

Wie erwartet – und dies insbesondere basierend auf meinen Erfahrungen mit diesen tricksenden Münchner Gerichten – ging dieser Richter mit keinem Wort auf meinen Hinweis in meiner ersten Beschwerde vom 14. Juli 2021 auf mein Anrecht auf rechtliches Gehör im Ermittlungsverfahren nach § 163a Abs. 1 Satz 1 StPO ein.

Bislang bin ich noch nicht gehört worden. Ich meine hier Anhörung und keine Anlesung. Des weiteren wurde meine Strafanzeige vom Dez. 2020 gegen diesen “Richter” Ehegartner übergangen. Sie befindet sich in der Gerichtsakte Exhibit 46 und 48. Seltsam, aber bei bayerischer Justiz nicht verwunderlich. Es ist also von Beginn deutlich erkennbar, dass ich keine faire Verhandlung erwarten kann.

Ich verweise nochmals auf den Beschluss des BVerfG 2 BvR 1304/12 und hier die Rn 14 und Rn 15 c.

Weiters verweise ich auf den ‘Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights’ (updated on 30 April 2021) und hier auf Abschnitt 174.

“In any case, in systems where the prosecuting authorities are obliged by law to take into consideration both the facts for and against the suspect, a procedure whereby the prosecuting authorities themselves attempt to assess what may or may not be relevant to the case, without any further procedural safeguards for the rights of the defence, cannot comply with the requirements of Article 6 § 1 (Natunen v. Finland, §§ 47-49; Matanović v. Croatia, §§ 158, 181- 182).”

Lassen sie mich der bayerischen Justiz und der föderal-deutschen unmissverständlich mitteilen:

  • Kein Richter trägt zum Betrug meiner tibetischen Tochter bei im Rassistenland Deutschland.
  • Kein deutsches Gericht verbietet mir, Deutschland ein abstossendes Rassistenland zu nennen.

NBB: Staatsanwältin Dendl ist dringend ein Basiskurs Grammatik, insbesondere des Vokativs, nahegelegt.

Danke

Precocious Munich public prosecutor Missus Dendl pleads her linguistic prowess

We interrupt our usual program and switch live to precocious, slightly linguistically challenged Munich public prosecutor Missus Dendl to learn more about criminal offences. Here Criminal Code 185.

The following sentence is an insult and therefore a criminal offence:

This is how neoliberal economic policies are legally executed in a democracy, Roland Freisler.

Staatsanwältin Dendl

Not sure, is this her Tinder profile picture to promote her etiolated intellect? The Mata Hari of the Prealps, Feng yue du Nymphenburg.

German Ministry of Justice, does calling Germany a racist country constitute a criminal offence according to Criminal Code 185?

First some essential reading.
Human Rights Law Review: Hate Speech and the European Court of Human Rights: Whatever Happened to the Right to Offend, Shock or Disturb?

German-Style Internet Censorship Catches On Around the World. Do read the comments there.

The World Loves Free Speech—Except When They’re Offended. Finally, that ubiquitous “hate speech” trope and Popehat’s Ken White with ‘How To Spot And Critique Censorship Tropes In The Media’s Coverage Of Free Speech Controversies‘.

. . . . . . . . . .

Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz
Berlin

cc Bavarian Administrative Court, Munich Administrative Court, Social Court Munich, Bavarian State Social Court, Local Court Munich

June 18, 2021

Statement ‘Germany is a disgusting racist country’ a criminal offense (CC 185) ?

Dear Federal Minister of Justice Lambrecht,

I can not help but notice that any form of Free Speech is in perpetual decline in your country that has meanwhile embarked on the hate speech trope. In a case in which a stupid and devious civil servant from Munich used a false name when filing a criminal complaint with Munich police in May 2015 against me and my Tibetan daughter, I demanded to see his personnel file. This in order to prove the real person behind the alias ‘C. Paucher’. As expected, it was declined.

In my complaint with the Bavarian State Social Court from May 7, 2019 (File # L 1 SV 16/19 B) I called Germany a “disgusting racist country” (“widerwärtiges Rassistenland Deutschland”). Judge Dietrich of the Munich Administrative Court saw this assessment as a vilification (“Schmähung”) (Criminal Code 185) of Germany in his decision from April 9, 2021 (File # M 32 K 19.4219 and M 32 K 20.508) and refused to accept the case (see annex). Based on a law that exists only in the province of Bavaria and contravenes Basic Law.

I am not sure now if this judge is aware that CC 185 protects the personal honor. A state is not a person or an individual. It pains me to have to expressly state the obvious, but I do get the distinct impression that free speech is not a fundamental human right this judge treasures. Besides, in just one letter judge Dietrich managed to impress me with his down to earth intellect.

As coincidence would have it, the ZEIT Online on June 6, 2021 featured – yet another – example of blatant racism in Germany. Martin Hyan relates there:

“We were beaten to hospital”.

Martin Hyun was the first German ice hockey player with Asian roots. Long before Corona, racism shaped his everyday life.

Martin Hyun: As a hockey player with South Korean roots, I was often the target of racism. From opposing players, coaches and fans. This was expressed quite openly, with insults like “Chink,” “Jap,” or “Fiji. Or with phrases like, “Why don’t you play in the rice paddy?” Once, fans referred to me as “Nasi Goreng,” and hundreds of spectators laughed. The message was clear: I am not one of them.

Hyun: Once I was stopped by a steward while I was out. He asked me about my function. He couldn’t imagine a person with Asian roots playing field hockey.

Integration in Germany? Hm, think again. Not even in German parliament.

Hyun: My parents came to the Federal Republic as guest workers in the early 1970s. My father was a miner, my mother a nurse. They were the first-born children and regularly sent money to their families in South Korea. My parents also worked weekends and never took vacations so that we children could afford the expensive schoolbooks. I thought that with a good degree, all doors would be open to me later. But it wasn’t like that.

ZEIT ONLINE: What was your experience?

Hyun: I worked temporarily for a member of parliament in the Bundestag. Once, a woman there wanted to call security because she couldn’t believe that someone like me was working in the hallowed halls of politics. Another time, during an interview for a job in diplomacy, I was asked about my loyalty to Germany.

More incidences readily spring to my mind:

Refugee withdraws Bundestag candidacy because of threat.

Tareq Alaows was the first refugee to want to run for the Bundestag. Now the Green politician has withdrawn his candidacy. The reasons are the “high threat situation” and “massive experiences of racism”.

Burning mattress in police detention cell with foreign person on it. Dead! The NSU killings … all covered up.

Does all this surprise me at all? No, considering the way your German labor agency Jobcenter, the Federal Labor Agency BA and your courts treated me and my Tibetan daughter.

So here is my question, Minister:

Does calling Germany a racist country constitute hate speech and /or is it a criminal offence according to Criminal Code 185?

The Minister of Justice’s opinion would then enable me to argue a criminal complaint against judge Dietrich and the Social Court Munich on a solid legal foundation. A criminal complaint for vilification of migrants in Germany. It will be fruitless, but in its ineffectiveness ultimately prove for the umpteenth time what Germany is, a disgusting racist country.

Please feel free to reply in German, preferably in Pdf form. Letters overwhelm me technically.

Thank you,