Complaint under official supervision (Dienstaufsichtsbeschwerde) to the President of Amtsgericht Tiergarten Berlin (Tiergarten Local Court in Berlin) concerning systematic refusal to record submissions

Dimitry Bagrash (register no. 2796/22/6), Alt-Moabit 12a, 10559 Berlin — To the President of Amtsgericht Tiergarten, Turmstraße 91, 10559 Berlin. Berlin, 24.03.2025.

Subject: Complaint under official supervision concerning systematic refusal to record supplements to the grounds for the appeal on points of law, complaints and other written submissions relevant to the proceedings.

Dear Sir or Madam, I hereby formally lodge a complaint under official supervision concerning the conduct of the registry of Amtsgericht Tiergarten Berlin, specifically the registry officers’ service, because of its repeated and systematic refusal to record my written submissions.

I. Background and facts

Between 15 January 2025 and 18 March 2025, I was repeatedly denied the opportunity to submit documents provided for by law and preserving deadlines for recording by the court registry under § 345 Abs. 2 StPO and § 158 Abs. 1 StPO. Documented incidents: 15.01.2025 (refusal citing an oral instruction); 24.02.2025 (refusal of the complaint about judicial inaction); 14.03.2025 (refusal after a superficial examination of the first page); 18.03.2025 (refusal of several written submissions, including a complaint of violation of the right to be heard (Anhörungsrüge) and a reference to EMRK).

II. Legal assessment

§ 345 Abs. 2 StPO permits supplementing the grounds for the appeal on points of law until the court hearing the appeal decides; § 158 Abs. 1 StPO requires oral criminal complaints and applications to be recorded; § 37 StPO requires a written acknowledgement of receipt. My right to be heard (Art. 103 Abs. 1 GG), to a fair trial (Art. 6 EMRK) and to effective judicial protection (Art. 19 Abs. 4 GG) are also substantially impaired.

III. Measures requested

1. Initiation of official supervisory proceedings against the registry officers responsible and their superiors. 2. Immediate acceptance of my supplements to the grounds for the appeal on points of law (Parts 3 and 4) and all future written submissions. 3. Disclosure of all internal administrative rules on the basis of which acceptance was refused. 4. Forwarding of this complaint under official supervision to Kammergericht Berlin (Berlin Higher Regional Court) and the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice). 5. Written confirmation of all my previous and future submissions under § 37 StPO.

Note: A copy of this complaint under official supervision is being sent for information to the Berlin Senate Department for Justice (Senatsverwaltung für Justiz Berlin), the Legal Affairs Committee of the German Bundestag, the Federal Bar Association (Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer), the German Press Council (Deutscher Presserat) and selected media outlets.

Yours sincerely, Dmitry Bagrash