⚖ Urgent: criminal defence lawyer sought — outside Berlin
Political prisoner, application lodged with the ECtHR, threatened with deportation. Unprecedented resistance from the Berlin prosecution service is expected. The lawyer must be based outside Berlin.
Details →Case 2 · My application · 16.01.2026 · to the management of Heidering prison (JVA Heidering)
Annex 94_F2 — Application for the sentence plan that had been missing for eight months
Formal application to the management of Heidering prison (JVA Heidering), by fax 030 901473-231, copied to the press office of the Senate Department for Justice (Senatsverwaltung für Justiz) and a mailing list of journalists. Deadline: 14 days.
Subject: immediate preparation, notification and handing over of the sentence and reintegration plan, and holding the prescribed sentence planning conference (Vollzugsplankonferenz). Both had been entirely omitted until then.
The time limits set out by the application. Berlin’s sentence execution law normally requires the sentence and reintegration plan within the first six weeks after the final decision has been sent to the prison. The decision became final on 08.05.2025; the transfer to Heidering took place on 10.06.2025. On the date of this application — 16.01.2026 — neither a plan nor a conference existed.
What the application expressly does not seek. The text itself makes clear: no favours, no pardon, no blanket leniency. What is requested is a public review by an independent court consistent with the rule of law.
The suspicion identified by the application — and how it is worded. Point 4 states that, as I understand it, this is not an oversight; it refers to Annex 84_F2, according to which a “common line” was developed with the Senate Department on 11.08.2025. The application requests an official examination of these submissions — it does not present them as established.
In the event of refusal or further delay, a written decision subject to appeal is expressly requested, with reference to §§ 108, 109 StVollzG — the latter also in the event of omission of a measure.
Subject: immediate preparation, notification and handing over of the sentence and reintegration plan, and holding the prescribed sentence planning conference (Vollzugsplankonferenz). Both had been entirely omitted until then.
The time limits set out by the application. Berlin’s sentence execution law normally requires the sentence and reintegration plan within the first six weeks after the final decision has been sent to the prison. The decision became final on 08.05.2025; the transfer to Heidering took place on 10.06.2025. On the date of this application — 16.01.2026 — neither a plan nor a conference existed.
What the application expressly does not seek. The text itself makes clear: no favours, no pardon, no blanket leniency. What is requested is a public review by an independent court consistent with the rule of law.
The suspicion identified by the application — and how it is worded. Point 4 states that, as I understand it, this is not an oversight; it refers to Annex 84_F2, according to which a “common line” was developed with the Senate Department on 11.08.2025. The application requests an official examination of these submissions — it does not present them as established.
In the event of refusal or further delay, a written decision subject to appeal is expressly requested, with reference to §§ 108, 109 StVollzG — the latter also in the event of omission of a measure.
Related context. This is the missing first link in the chain of prognoses. The sentence and reintegration plan, which later bases the risk of misuse on my “fight against the German justice system” (Annex 115_F2), is dated 17.04.2026 — three months after this application and about eleven months after the decision became final. The document that has since been held against me came into existence only after I formally compelled its preparation.
The diagnostic assessment is also dated the same 17.04.2026 (Annex 137_F2), from which all subsequent characterisations originate. The full chain: The missing link.
An unresolved discrepancy, recorded here rather than smoothed over: this application gives 22.12.2022 as the date of imprisonment; elsewhere in the documentation it is 14.12.2022. The discrepancy is unresolved and is not silently harmonised.
The diagnostic assessment is also dated the same 17.04.2026 (Annex 137_F2), from which all subsequent characterisations originate. The full chain: The missing link.
An unresolved discrepancy, recorded here rather than smoothed over: this application gives 22.12.2022 as the date of imprisonment; elsewhere in the documentation it is 14.12.2022. The discrepancy is unresolved and is not silently harmonised.
Until 30.08.2026 this document was missing from both the chronology of Case 2 and the website. It was identified subsequently; the gap is openly recorded here.