Complaint of a violation of the right to be heard against the BGH (Federal Court of Justice) concerning the Federal Court of Justice’s inactivity in proceedings on an appeal on points of law

Dmitry Bagrash, Alt-Moabit 12a, 10559 Berlin — To the Federal Court of Justice, Karl-Heine-Straße 12, 04229 Leipzig. Berlin, 26.03.2025.

Subject: Complaint of a violation of the right to be heard concerning the Federal Court of Justice’s inactivity in proceedings on an appeal on points of law, file reference: 5 StR 72/25.

Dear Sir or Madam, I hereby formally lodge a complaint of a violation of the right to be heard (Anhörungsrüge) concerning the Federal Court of Justice’s inactivity in proceedings on an appeal on points of law under § 356a StPO, because my right to be heard under Art. 103 Abs. 1 GG has been violated.

1. Violation of the right to be heard

The registry’s repeated refusal to accept my supplements to the statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law violates my fundamental right to be heard. This is documented, among other things, by: Annex 10/F2 (13.01.2025, complaint concerning judicial inactivity); Annex 14/F2 (13.02.2025, application for acknowledgement of receipt); Annex 16/F2 (17.02.2025); Annex 21/F2 (21.02.2025, immediate complaint (sofortige Beschwerde)); Annex 24/F2 (13.03.2025, interim order); Annex 27/F2 (24.03.2025, complaint under administrative supervision).

2. Legal representation and access to the case file

My lawyer has still not been released from his court appointment, although I applied for this as early as 17.12.2024. As a result, I am de facto without a defence. I am also being denied access to the case file.

3. Unlawful refusal to forward mail

In the declaration in lieu of oath of 25.03.2025 I state that my outgoing and incoming mail was arbitrarily withheld by Moabit correctional facility (JVA Moabit).

4. Application for acceptance and consideration

I apply for the acceptance of parts 2, 3 and 4 of the supplements to the statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law, as well as the documents concerning the allegation of fraud involving coronavirus emergency assistance, and announce that I will submit parts 5, 6 and 7.

5.–6. Acknowledgement and direct delivery

I request written acknowledgement under § 37 StPO; since the registry unlawfully refused acceptance, the documents are being submitted directly to the BGH.

Applications

1. Finding of inactivity by the Federal Court of Justice. 2. Order for immediate processing of the supplements submitted. 3. Order to clarify whether the registry duly entered the submissions on the record. 4. Investigation of the systematic refusal of mail and entry of submissions on the record by JVA Moabit. 5. Acknowledgement under § 37 StPO.

Evidence: Alongside the annexes cited and the chronologies of Case 2 and Case 3, declarations in lieu of oath by two acquaintances (Anna B. and Julia K.) were enclosed; independently of one another, they document the circumstances after pronouncement of the judgment, the lack of contact with the lawyer, the isolation and the announcement of a hunger strike because of the court’s inactivity.

Yours sincerely, Dmitry Bagrash