End of the hunger strike
On 12.08.2025, I ended my hunger strike.
On 11.08.2025, the deputy prison director had proposed taking me to the registry official. Already on 04.08.2025 — only after the hunger strike began — the previously withheld letter containing documents for the European Court of Human Rights (EGMR) had been handed over to me. My immediate demands from the hunger strike were thus fulfilled, but important applications remained unanswered.
In particular, I received no written response from the prison director to my application of 11.06.2025 concerning access to the registry official (UKB). Nor have I received a response to my written submission to the Berlin Senate Department for Justice.
I had to refuse the offered transport to the UKB because the statutory time limit had already been exceeded by several weeks. The offer came only two months after the time limit expired and could no longer preserve my rights. Moreover, I had already received a refusal from the Federal Court of Justice (BGH). This caused me serious disadvantages and irreparable damage.
Conclusion: in Berlin’s justice system under Senator Dr. Badenberg, fundamental rights can in practice be enforced only through means such as hunger strikes and involving the media. Civil servants and public officials who have repeatedly fulfilled the elements of criminal offences remain unpunished because they are protected by the Senator for Justice. I continue to demand independent investigations — involving the media — as well as official and criminal consequences for the justice officials responsible for the violations of rights and repeated disregard of the law. (Annex 67_F2)
Dmitry Bagrash, Heidering Prison (JVA Heidering), Ernst-Stargardt-Allee 1, 14979 Großbeeren. Declaration in lieu of an oath (§ 294 Abs. 1 ZPO).
1. Occasion and participants: On 11.08.2025, during my hunger strike, I was invited to a discussion in the afternoon by the head of the sub-institution, House 1 (TAL), at Heidering Prison. The head of the custodial service for House 1 (VDL) was also present.
2. Offer by the TAL: During this discussion, the TAL offered to take me immediately to the certifying official of the court registry (UKB) “as an exception”.
3. Application already submitted and urgency: I refused this offer because I had already submitted the corresponding application to be taken to the UKB on 11.06.2025, expressly pointing out its urgency.
4. Assurance by the social worker, absence of a written response: Immediately after I submitted the application, the responsible social worker, Ms Dahms, told me orally that I would be taken there. Despite repeated reminders, to date I have received no written decision/response to my application of 11.06.2025.
5. Response from the BGH in the meantime: On 17.07.2025, I had already received a response from the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) (BGH) to some of the objections I had raised.
6. Refusal of the ad hoc offer on 11.08.2025: In view of the decision already outstanding since 11.06.2025, I refused the TAL’s ad hoc offer on 11.08.2025 and explained that the TAL’s failure to act in breach of his duties had caused me significant legal disadvantage. I insist on a written decision on my application of 11.06.2025, also because of the risk of recurrence.
7. Refusal of a written decision: The TAL told me that no written decision would be issued. When I pointed out that this was unlawful, the TAL remained silent on that point. Instead, he said I could now be taken to the UKB. In my view, this was no longer appropriate because the urgency and time limits I had invoked had already been allowed to lapse.
8. Access to the UKB / correspondence with the EGMR: In fact, until then I had had no actual access to the UKB. My letters addressed to the EGMR were sent without my previously requested appearance before the UKB.
9. Letters to the Senate Department for Justice (Berlin): Several letters to the Senate Department remained unanswered; I also received no acknowledgements of receipt for the following mailings: 20.06.2025 (Annex 48_F2), 25.07.2025 (Annex 58_F2), 04.08.2025 (Annex 62_F2), 05.08.2025 (Annex 63_F2).
Conclusion: I am aware that a false declaration in lieu of an oath is punishable under § 156 StGB. I declare in lieu of an oath that the above statements are true and complete to the best of my knowledge and conscience.
Place/date: Berlin, 13.08.2025
Commentary — assessment by Dmitry Bagrash
I ended the hunger strike after being offered the prospect of being taken to the registry official on 11.08.2025. Legally, nothing had thereby been decided — there was no formal decision, no information on legal remedies and no finding. This very event was later cited in the prison’s statement as evidence that my request had been “granted”.
Document source
Annex 67_F2 (declaration in lieu of an oath of 13.08.2025 on ending the hunger strike): Anlage_67_F2.pdf
The underlying application of 11.06.2025 for access to the UKB is pursued further in the later application under § 109 StVollzG (F2-116, Annex 74_F2); the start of the hunger strike is documented under F2-103.