Negative list
OStA Raupach (senior public prosecutor)
Staatsanwaltschaft Berlin (Berlin Public Prosecutor’s Office; as of 2021)
This page concerns an episode on 17 September 2021 — more than a year before the alleged act with which I am charged.
1 Seizure of a banner at a notified protest
On 17.09.2021, during the weekend of the Russian Duma election, my banner was seized at a duly notified protest opposite the Russian embassy. According to my account, the order was given personally. The proceedings subsequently brought against me for alleged insult were discontinued after a few months under § 170 Abs. 2 StPO — without an indictment.
Art. 5 Abs. 1 GG · Art. 8 GG · § 170 Abs. 2 StPO · § 94 StPO
Significance: Discontinuance without an indictment is the official evidence that the basis for the seizure did not hold. Chronology No. 120 · The seizure was judicially confirmed on 05.10.2021 — by the same judge who issued the detention warrant 14 months later
Alternative hypothesis The officers directing an operation on the ground must decide within seconds and may, at a diplomatically sensitive rally outside a foreign embassy, order a seizure as a precaution without thereby making a political assessment of my protest.
What is missing Subsequent written reasons explaining why the banner itself was classified as a danger; the later proceedings were discontinued under § 170 Abs. 2 StPO.
2 The same period in which the OSCE statements were made
During the same period, the Russian delegation to the OSCE expressly named my organisation — in statements of 23.09.2021 (PC.DEL/1483/21) and 08.04.2022 (PC.DEL/526/22). Both references are identified in Part 7 of the supplement to the grounds of my appeal on points of law.
Art. 5 Abs. 1 GG · § 261 StPO
Significance: In my assessment, these two strands — international visibility on the one hand and official intervention in Berlin on the other — refute the interpretation in the judgment that my political activities had met with no response. Full text of the supplement, Part 7 · Background
Alternative hypothesis The temporal proximity of an OSCE statement and a measure within Germany may be coincidental if the people and authorities involved act independently of each other.
What is missing Any evidence that the body deciding on the ground even knew of the OSCE statements — I do not assert this connection; I merely record the temporal proximity.
Sources: Annex 120_F2 · OSCE PC.DEL/1483/21 and PC.DEL/526/22 · Case 2 chronology, No. 120. This page presents Dmitry Bagrash’s account and legal assessment and distinguishes between documented episodes and information provided by the person concerned.