Sending the individual application under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights (EMRK) to the European Court of Human Rights (EGMR) against the Federal Republic of Germany. The application concerns the violation of my rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (Annex 35_F3).

NOTE: I submitted applications to the chaplaincy service and social service of Moabit correctional facility (JVA Moabit) to participate in a Jewish religious service or meet a rabbi, unsuccessfully, at regular intervals on: 12.09.2024; 19.09.2024; 26.09.2024;

03.10.2024; 10.10.2024; 17.10.2024; 20.10.2024; 31.10.2024; 08.11.2024; 12.11.2024;

20.11.2024 (Annex 21).

Calls to the telephone number of the Jewish community Chabad Berlin were enabled only 116 days after the application and 4 days before the announced hunger strike.

What was so special about the refusal decision of Senior Public Prosecutor Wachs (OStA)Senior Public Prosecutor Klaus Michael Wachs, a central figure in the prosecution in these proceedings. Also mentioned in the parliamentary report on the Breitscheidplatz case. of 30.08.2024 that could justify him so strictly withholding the letter from me? Judge GroßPresiding judge at the Berlin Regional Court I in criminal case 522 Ks 5/23. Dmitry Bagrash publicly alleges that he subsequently altered the judgment; on 02.09.2026 he filed a criminal complaint over this. No decision has yet been made on the complaint; the presumption of innocence applies. nevertheless quoted this decision on 17.10.2024 (see Annex 2): “Unsupervised telephone calls (see above) are not permitted, since it cannot be conclusively assessed who specifically has access to the telephone line. Unobserved visits by the rabbi named are, however, permitted.” The issue here is the official telephone number of the state-recognised religious community governed by public law, the Jewish community in Berlin!

Permission for unsupervised visits by the rabbi named was not requested from the judge, since such visits do not require permission (these visits nevertheless did not take place (Annex 21/F3); see also the NOTE above). I suspect that Judge GroßPresiding judge at the Berlin Regional Court I in criminal case 522 Ks 5/23. Dmitry Bagrash publicly alleges that he subsequently altered the judgment; on 02.09.2026 he filed a criminal complaint over this. No decision has yet been made on the complaint; the presumption of innocence applies. quoted this decision and treats me in this way because he assumed that I was legally incompetent and helpless in legal matters.

Do you think that the judgmentThe judgment of the Berlin Regional Court (LG Berlin) of 22.07.2024 initially contained no list of the provisions applied (§ 260 Abs. 5 StPO). The list was inserted only on 30.07.2025 — 373 days later and after the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decision. on the part of Judge GroßPresiding judge at the Berlin Regional Court I in criminal case 522 Ks 5/23. Dmitry Bagrash publicly alleges that he subsequently altered the judgment; on 02.09.2026 he filed a criminal complaint over this. No decision has yet been made on the complaint; the presumption of innocence applies. and Senior Public Prosecutor Wachs (OStA)Senior Public Prosecutor Klaus Michael Wachs, a central figure in the prosecution in these proceedings. Also mentioned in the parliamentary report on the Breitscheidplatz case. of 22.07.24 for attempted murder was any different? — No, and I will prove all of this just as meticulously.

Key:

AagE — application for a judicial decision

Senior Public Prosecutor Wachs (OStA)Senior Public Prosecutor Klaus Michael Wachs, a central figure in the prosecution in these proceedings. Also mentioned in the parliamentary report on the Breitscheidplatz case. — official of the Berlin Prosecutor General’s Office, Senior Public Prosecutor Wachs. VRiLG Judge GroßPresiding judge at the Berlin Regional Court I in criminal case 522 Ks 5/23. Dmitry Bagrash publicly alleges that he subsequently altered the judgment; on 02.09.2026 he filed a criminal complaint over this. No decision has yet been made on the complaint; the presumption of innocence applies. — presiding judge at the Berlin Regional Court (22nd large criminal chamber), Mr Groß.

AL Moabit — Moabit facility management

According to the law, my contact with the Jewish community as a state-recognised religious community governed by public law may not be restricted under any circumstances. But what actually happened? In September 2024, Judge GroßPresiding judge at the Berlin Regional Court I in criminal case 522 Ks 5/23. Dmitry Bagrash publicly alleges that he subsequently altered the judgment; on 02.09.2026 he filed a criminal complaint over this. No decision has yet been made on the complaint; the presumption of innocence applies. and Senior Public Prosecutor Wachs learned through the observation by the State Criminal Police Office (LKA) during Andreas Heinemann-Grüder’s visit that I was trying to find lawyers with the help of the Jewish community in order to initiate investigations against Senior Public Prosecutor Wachs.

After that, all my attempts to establish contact with the Jewish community were suppressed.

* I duly submitted all applications for a judicial decision for the record at the registry of JVA Moabit.

Jewish community — at the following link you can view and download all the content and annexes (investigation documents): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17tgXQRfpAdjxzUGTSCFrNUIADtwyTiY8?usp=drive_link

At the following link, you can view and download all the content together with photographs and annexes (investigation documents). The documents are updated:

File contents:

Background: events before imprisonment (suspected background to the prosecution) https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1AF6WYX74nDVxPwQWl-b6KdxLOGeLkaKy?usp=sharing

Link to download annexes to Case-0:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1I7eaTTepSWhg2vnvW0H_5cbUfHQZOfVp?usp=drive_link

The criminal proceedings “Attempted murder” https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_qY5_JpmuK7CPKQy7E4jf7HQXNMYRTVa?usp=drive_link

Link to download annexes to Case-1:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13mGMj8ck4OovvQYomadcTg2Yc1NM5fXz?usp=drive_link

Access to court. Unlawful suppression of the statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law (Revision)The statement of grounds for the appeal on points of law (Revision) against the judgment of 22.07.2024, submitted by court-appointed defence counsel on 28.11.2024. to the BGH

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Foiqj5hGYlgL-DvI84T2g5uT53Wo0xOI?usp=drive_link

Link to download annexes to Case-2:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1RZzST5HDZcDErv2qatlFyirW_Fmyrf-F?usp=drive_link

Jewish community. Unlawful obstruction of my contacts with the Jewish community and my search for a lawyer https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17tgXQRfpAdjxzUGTSCFrNUIADtwyTiY8?usp=drive_link

Link to download annexes to Case-3:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1BKZx0sUhC7wx-Ds_oGFyQvlQes8tqvdo?usp=drive_link

Link to download all documents in zip format:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1VgZ9fZZHuIgDzvAnis_b82EBTsPBdq7K?usp=drive_link