Response to the statement of the Prosecutor General’s Office (Generalstaatsanwaltschaft) in proceedings 2 Ws 111/26
In my response I disputed the request of the Prosecutor General’s Office (Generalstaatsanwaltschaft) of 14.07.2026. I emphasised that it addresses none of the specific procedural facts I complained of. I also documented again that I did not know the full statement of 26.05.2026 before the hearing, and that lawful complaints, hunger strikes against blocked legal protection, publication of official documents, political activity and maintaining my innocence must not be used as indicators of dangerousness without a specific factual basis.
I requested that the order of 24.06.2026 be set aside, full access to the file and a further opportunity to make representations, and, alternatively, that the immediate complaint (sofortige Beschwerde) be decided only after the right to be heard had been fully afforded.
Date note: the written submission is dated 27.07.2026; the fax report, however, records an earlier transmission time of 25.07.2026 at 17:54, seven pages, transmission “OK”.
Commentary — Dmitry Bagrash’s assessment
The response links the violation of the right to be heard with the substantive core of the proceedings: although a confession is formally described as non-mandatory, in practice the refusal to acknowledge the offence continues to be used against my liberty.