Statement following the hearing of 24.06.2026 in proceedings 589 StVK 86/26 and Open Statement following refusal to suspend the remainder of the sentence on probation

JVA Heidering / Grossbeeren, 25 June 2026 — To the Berlin Regional Court I, Chamber for the Execution of Criminal Sentences, Turmstrasse 91, 10559 Berlin. Az. 589 StVK 86/26

On 24.06.2026, the Berlin Regional Court I held a hearing on suspension of the remainder of the sentence. I make this supplementary statement and expressly complain of the conduct of the hearing.

I. Incomplete access to documents material to the decision

I received the statement of the prison (Justizvollzugsanstalt) of 07.05.2026 only on 22.06.2026 at 19:25. Proper legal examination before the hearing was no longer possible for me. In my letter of 18.06.2026 I had already complained that the Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Berlin statement had been sent to me only in part (missing second page). At the hearing, the judge said in substance that this was immaterial. A decision on my freedom must not rely on documents not made fully available to me before the hearing.

II. No reply to the request for press access

I had requested admission of the press to the hearing or a timely decision on that request. I received neither a written nor an oral decision. The hearing was closed and also — according to my perception — took place outside the room specified in the summons. This prevented public scrutiny of proceedings already subject to public documentation and journalistic interest.

III. No opportunity to have protests recorded

At the start of the hearing, I asked about a person keeping the record. The judge stated that she was alone and there would be no record. My request to lodge protests was initially refused or postponed until the end of the hearing. I expressly request that my objections be placed on the file and that I receive written confirmation that they have become part of the court file.

IV. Practical pressure to incriminate myself

At the hearing it was repeatedly stated that early release could not be contemplated without coming to terms with the offence. I continue to deny committing the act and will not confess to obtain freedom. Freedom at the price of my silence and admission of an act I did not commit is no freedom to me.

V. Use of the hunger strike as an alleged prison problem

At the hearing, I was accused of infringements in prison — my hunger strike was given as an example. I reject this: my hunger strike was not a breach of prison rules but a protest against the blockade of my access to courts, documents, post and registry officials documented over months.

VI. Requests (extract)

• Place this statement on the file without delay
• Give full access to the file and all documents material to the decision
• State whether and in what form the hearing was documented
• Find that refusal to accept a judgment I consider wrong must not be used as an indicator of dangerousness
• Find that hunger strikes protesting documented blockades of legal protection must not be used against me as a breach of prison rules