Renewed formal complaint against Moabit Prison (Justizvollzugsanstalt Moabit)

Dmitry Bagrash, Alt-Moabit 12a, 10559 Berlin — To the Berlin Senate Department for Justice, Prison Administration / Administrative Supervision (Dienstaufsicht) Division, Salzburger Straße 21–25, 10825 Berlin. Berlin, 24.04.2025. Reference: IIIA9-4510-0027/2025/E.

Subject: Renewed formal complaint against Moabit Prison — application for a separate and independent examination by the Berlin Senate Department for Justice under Art. 19 Abs. 4 GG, §§ 839 BGB, 198 GVG, § 17 EGStGB.

Dear Sir or Madam, with reference to my letter of 26.03.2025 and your reply of 03.04.2025, I hereby again lodge a formal complaint against Moabit Prison. I expressly request a direct, separate and independent examination of the points in my complaint by the Senate Department itself, rather than merely forwarding them to the prison for internal examination.

I. Initial legal position

1. Right to effective legal protection (Art. 19 Abs. 4 GG): The Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) (BVerfG, NJW 1997, 2795; BVerfGE 84, 34 — “Guarantee of legal protection II”) emphasises that legal protection must be more than formal: it must be effective in practice and neutral. A mere reference to internal examination procedures without independent scrutiny is insufficient.

2. Duty of examination under administrative supervision (§ 839 BGB, § 17 EGStGB, § 24 UVollzG Bln): Every detainee has the right to lodge an administrative supervision complaint (Dienstaufsichtsbeschwerde) with the superior authority, which is obliged to examine the allegations objectively and independently.

3. Independence and neutrality: According to the BVerfG (order of 22.05.1990 — 2 BvR 313/90) and the European Court of Human Rights (EGMR) (Pudas/Schweden, 21.06.1988), it is insufficient to have complaints examined solely by the authority concerned itself.

II. Facts — summary of the allegations

Systematic obstruction of my right to be heard (§ 103 Abs. 1 GG, Art. 6 EMRK); refusal to take supplements to the grounds of appeal on points of law on the record; blocking and monitoring of my mail (§§ 33, 34 UVollzG Bln, Art. 4 GG, § 148 StPO); interference with contact with my religious community; undue delay in decisions (§ 198 GVG, § 120 GVG, § 24 UVollzG Bln); connection with my pursuit of legal protection before the BVerfG and EGMR (retaliatory measures/harassment).

III. Application

1. Separate examination by the Senate Department itself, rather than only by Moabit Prison. 2. Written confirmation of a separate examination under administrative supervision. 3. Provision of a detailed response on the merits. 4. Reservation of the right to complain to the Petitions Committee of the Berlin House of Representatives, to lodge a constitutional complaint, and to inform national and international human rights bodies if examination continues to be internal only.

I expressly release the Senate Department from its duty of confidentiality towards the Petitions Committee, parliamentary oversight bodies, independent human rights organisations and the media.

Yours faithfully, Dmitry Bagrash