Sending a reasoned complaint to the Senate Department by email
On 05.08.2025, I sent by email a reasoned complaint entitled
“Ongoing serious violations of fundamental rights at Heidering Prison (JVA Heidering) tolerated by the Senate Department — hunger strike since 04.08.2025 — demand for immediate legal clarification”
to Senator Dr. Badenberg and State Secretary Feuerberg (Berlin Senate Department for Justice).
In it, I described in detail the unlawful interferences to date — particularly mail inspection, denial of legal remedies subject to time limits and blocking of access to justice — and demanded the immediate initiation of official and criminal investigations. At the same time, it was stated that my hunger strike would continue until a legally binding response was received. (Annex 63_F2 and Annex 64_F2)
Annex 63_F2 — Legal assessment of mail inspection at Heidering Prison in the case of Dmitry Bagrash (for submission to the Berlin Senate Department for Justice and other bodies).
I. Introduction
In connection with the events of 01.08.2025 at Heidering Prison (Justizvollzugsanstalt Heidering), when a letter addressed to me containing drafts of an individual application to the European Court of Human Rights (EGMR) was opened, read and withheld without authority, I hereby give a legal assessment of the permissibility of mail inspection in Berlin’s prison system. This annex documents that the measure was clearly unlawful, possibly criminal, and violated fundamental and human rights in its effects.
II. Statutory basis — § 24 StVollzG Bln
§ 24 Abs. 2 StVollzG Bln: “Prisoners’ correspondence may be inspected if this is necessary for reasons of institutional security or to prevent crimes.” The provision does not permit general or routine inspection, but necessarily requires: a specific danger to the institution’s security or order in the individual case, an assessment of proportionality, and documentation of the measure consistent with the rule of law.
III. Requirements for lawful mail inspection
1. No automatic inspection: The power to inspect always requires a specific reason, written grounds and a documented process. 2. Inspection of sensitive contents: Inspection of mail relating to judicial proceedings, constitutional or human rights complaints, or communication with international institutions is generally impermissible unless there is an explicit suspicion of misuse. The European Convention on Human Rights (EMRK) (Art. 6 and 34) expressly protects free access to the EGMR.
IV. Assessment of the specific case of 01.08.2025
On 01.08.2025, a letter addressed to me containing drafts of an individual application to the EGMR and accompanying documents was opened, read and initially withheld by the officer on the unit, Mr Mattusch, without my presence, without an apparent reason or danger, without documentation and without notification or a legal basis. Only on 04.08.2025, after my hunger strike began, was the letter handed over to me without comment. To date, no written record or official file exists that would legally justify this measure.
V. Legal appraisal
The measure violates: 1. Art. 10 Abs. 1 GG — secrecy of mail. 2. § 24 Abs. 2 StVollzG Bln — inspection took place without a danger assessment, documentation or a record. 3. § 202 StGB — violation of the secrecy of correspondence. 4. Art. 34 EMRK in conjunction with Art. 6 EMRK — obstruction of my communication with the EGMR. 5. Possibly § 339 StGB (Rechtsbeugung — perversion of justice) or § 258a StGB (obstruction of prosecution in public office).
VI. Demand
I demand examination of the measure of 01.08.2025 under public service law, substantive administrative supervision (Fachaufsicht) and, if applicable, criminal law, as well as a binding written statement on whether the administration considers the officer’s conduct lawful. At the same time, I request a written copy of the inspection record, the grounds and the decision to withhold the mail — if such a document exists.
Dimitry Bagrash, Heidering Prison (JVA Heidering), Berlin, 05 August 2025
Email from Dmitry Bagrash (bagrash.presse@gmail.com), 5 August 2025, 19:53. Subject: ongoing serious violations of fundamental rights at Heidering Prison tolerated by the Senate Department — hunger strike since 04.08.2025 — demand for immediate legal clarification. To: Berlin Senate Department for Justice (Senator, State Secretary, mailroom, press office); cc: Heidering Prison and national and cross-regional press and international human rights bodies. (Some additional private email addresses of individuals listed as cc recipients in the original have not been included here for data protection reasons.)
Dear Senator Dr. Badenberg, dear State Secretary Feuerberg, I have been on an indefinite hunger strike since 04.08.2025 because I was forced to resort to this last means to draw attention to ongoing, systematic interferences with my fundamental and procedural rights contrary to the rule of law.
1. Violation of the secrecy of mail and correspondence (Art. 10 GG, § 202 StGB)
On 01.08.2025, a letter delivered to me by post was not handed over, but was opened, read and withheld without a legal basis by an employee (Mr Mattusch). It contained documents for submitting an application to the EGMR. The letter was handed over to me only after my hunger strike began on 04.08.
2. Systematic denial of access to justice since 10.06.2025
After my transfer from Moabit Prison (JVA Moabit) on 10.06.2025, I was denied access to the registry official at Heidering Prison, on the arbitrary ground of allegedly expired time limits; denied any access to writing materials; and denied access to administrative files, decision notices and communication through official channels.
3. Responsibility of the Senate Department
Under § 145 Abs. 1 Satz 2 PrVollzG Berlin, your authority exercises substantive administrative supervision over prisons. Your inaction despite repeated notifications constitutes a culpable breach of official duties and establishes liability for official misconduct under Art. 34 GG in conjunction with § 839 BGB.
4. Demands
1. Opening an internal investigation against the management of Heidering Prison and the employee Mattusch. 2. Criminal and disciplinary examination. 3. Restoration of my access to justice. 4. A written statement open to legal challenge within 7 days.
5. Concluding question to the Senator for Justice
In your view, is it compatible with the free democratic constitutional order that a person in Berlin in 2025 is forced into a hunger strike in order to be able to pursue an application before the EGMR at all?
Please acknowledge receipt of this letter without delay. Until then, my hunger strike will continue.
With determined regards, Dmitry Bagrash, currently at Heidering Prison, email: bagrash.presse@gmail.com
Also attached was a detailed legal assessment of § 339 StGB (Rechtsbeugung — perversion of justice), applying the elements of the offence to the facts described (public official status of the prison and Senate Department employees involved, the existence of a “legal matter”, arbitrary departure from the law, intent), and listing as options a criminal complaint, a constitutional complaint, an individual application to the EGMR and a submission to the UN Special Rapporteur on torture.
Commentary — assessment by Dmitry Bagrash
The reasoned complaint went directly to the Senator. The leadership of the supervisory authority was thus fully informed from 05.08.2025 — six days before 11.08.2025, when, according to Annex 84_F2, a “common line” was developed with the Senate Department. I consider this temporal proximity worth documenting.
Document source
Annex 63_F2 (legal assessment of the mail inspection): Anlage_63_F2.docx / Anlage_63_F2.pdf
Annex 64_F2 (email complaint of 05.08.2025): Anlage_64_F2.pdf
The underlying incident of 01.08.2025 is documented under F2-101.