Complaint under administrative supervision (Dienstaufsichtsbeschwerde) to the Regional Court concerning Groß, presiding judge at the Regional Court (VRiLG)

Dmitry Bagrash, Alt-Moabit 12a, 10559 Berlin — To the President of the Berlin Regional Court, Turmstraße 91, 10559 Berlin. Berlin, 31.03.2025. Registry reference LG I 3132 E-4-34/2024.

Subject: Complaint under administrative supervision concerning VRiLG Groß, presiding judge at the Berlin Regional Court, for systematic refusal to enter supplements to the statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law, complaints and other submissions relevant to the proceedings on the record.

This complaint is also being sent to the Berlin Senate Department for Justice and various media outlets. I expressly release the Berlin Regional Court from its duty of confidentiality towards the media and the German Bundestag.

I. Facts and background

In the course of my proceedings on an appeal on points of law (file references 522 Ks 5/23, 176 Js 4/22), unlawful acts by VRiLG Groß repeatedly occurred from 15.01.2025, severely restricting my rights to have submissions entered on the record, to be heard and to file written submissions.

1. Failure to forward supplements to the statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law (parts 1 and 2): Despite proper submission, the documents were not forwarded to the competent court hearing the appeal on points of law — a violation of § 37 StPO.

2. Failure to forward complaints concerning judicial inactivity: Several complaints under § 198 GVG were not forwarded to the next higher instance.

3. Failure to decide on applications for a judicial decision: Applications for lawyer Römer (RA) to be released from his court appointment and for access to the case file have not been processed to date — a violation of Art. 19 Abs. 4 GG.

4. Refusal of access to the case file and release of defence counsel from his court appointment: Despite a serious breach of trust, access to the case file was refused.

5. Misleading information about time limits: Through contradictory information about the time limit and form of the statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law, VRiLG Groß deliberately misrepresented the legal position.

6. Direct instructions to court registry officers: On several occasions VRiLG Groß directly instructed court registry officers at Tiergarten Local Court not to accept my written submissions.

7. Withholding of applications to the Kammergericht (Higher Regional Court) and the BGH: Applications addressed directly to these courts were deliberately withheld.

II. Demands

1. Immediate acceptance of all supplements to the statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law and complaints. 2. Review of VRiLG Groß’s conduct under the law governing judicial service. 3. Forwarding of the complaint under administrative supervision to the competent court hearing complaints and the Federal Court of Justice. 4. Acknowledgement of the written submissions received under § 37 StPO. 5. Publication of the content of the complaint and review by independent institutions.

Closing statement: I demand an immediate review of VRiLG Groß’s conduct and a written response within seven days.

Yours sincerely, Dmitry Bagrash