Donate/Spenden Side

Please support my efforts against judicial authorities

Bitte unterstützen Sie meine Bemühungen gegen Justizbehörden

 

Related Links

http://constitutionalcomplaintgermany2015.blogspot.com/2015/03/verfassungsbeschwerde-deutschland-2015.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_11.html

http://abtmuc-myconception-ger.blogspot.de/2014/06/mein-selbstverstandnis-aufgrund-unserer.html

http://abtmuc-myconception-eng.blogspot.de/2014/06/my-self-conception-about-responsibility.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_8.html

 

http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/petition2constitutionalcourtgermany2015_14.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/08/offener-brief-das-amtsgericht-munchen.html

 

http://openletter2ragregorrose.blogspot.com/2014/05/offener-brief-rechtsanwalt-gregor-rose.html

 

http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/petition2constitutionalcourtgermanyen20.html

http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/openletter2constitutionalcourtgermany20.html
 
http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/openletter2constitutionalcourtgermanyen.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/02/veroffentlichen-eines-offenen-briefes.html

 

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/07/offenerbrief-zum-thema-wennsich.html
 

 

Petition2ConstitutionalCourtGermany_201506

Abe Treiner  *   Leopoldstraße 124   *   D-80802 München
Bundesverfassungsgericht Postfach 1771 76006 Karlsruhe
		München, 14. Juni 2015

Die Petition richtet sich an
Bundesverfassungsgericht der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

„Wir sind nicht nur verantwortlich für das, was wir tun,
sondern auch für das, was wir nicht tun.“
― Molière

„So läuft der Unterschied zwischen traditionellen und modernen Lügen im
Grunde auf den Unterschied zwischen Verbergen und Vernichten hinaus.“
― Hannah Arendt

„Wenn Unrecht zu Recht wird, wird Widerstand zur Pflicht!“

― Berthold Brecht

Sehr verehrter Präsident des Bundesverfassungsgerichts,

Sehr verehrter Herr Prof. Dr. Voßkuhle,

Sehr verehrte Leser und im Anhang genannten Empfänger,

der Grundgesetzgeber hat explizit aufgrund der Erfahrungen aus dem Unrechtssystem den nach Art. 34 GG artikulierten Anspruch auf unbehinderten Rechtsweg festgelegt. Der Grund hierfür war zweifellos, dass nur mit diesem Anspruch ein wiedererstehendes Unrechtssystem wirksam begegnet werden kann. Wenn zur Verhinderung des Wiedererstsehens eines Unrechtssystem erst unkalkulierbare Kosten in Kauf genommen werden müssten, dann wäre ein solcher Anspruch von Beginn an zum Scheitern verurteilt.

Demzufolge widersprechen Hürden zur Durchsetzbarkeit von Rechtsansprüchen bei, von Rechts- und Ausführungsorganen verursachten, Rechtsfehler diesen grundgesetzlichen Vorgaben. Der Grundgesetzgeber hat zudem die nach Art.19 Abs. 2/4 Unantastbarkeit des Wesensgehalt von Grundrechten manifestiert. Weiter hat der Grundgesetzgeber, ebenfalls aufgrund der Erfahrungen aus dem Unrechtssystem, dem Verfassungsgericht die Verantwortung und Kontrolle dafür übertragen, dass Kernbestimmungen des Grundgesetzes unabdingbar gewahrt bleiben und damit für das Verfassungsgericht einen Handlungszwang manifestiert, sobald es Kenntnis von Verletzungen dieser Kernbestimmungen erhält.

Die Weltgemeinschaft hatte einst die unterbundene Einklagbarkeit von, von Rechts- und Ausführungsorganen verursachten, Rechtsfehlers als Wesensmerkmal eines Unrechtssystem identifiziert. Im zugrunde liegenden Verfahren wurde von einer Richterin des Landgerichts München klar und unmissverständlich das Versagen der Vorinstanzen und der involvierten Rechts- und Ausführungsorgane erkannt und thematisiert. Die Richterin hatte nicht nur eine Missachtung des Rechtsgrundsatzes 'keine Bestrafung ohne Tat' festgestellte sondern auch die missbräuchliche Anwendung von Mechanismen angesprochen, die zweifellos Assoziationen zum Unrechtssystems erkennen lassen.

Die Philosophin Hannah Arendt hat die Entstehung von Unrechtssystemen maßgeblich auf das unreflektierte Handeln von Angehörigen der Rechts- und Ausführungsorgane zurückgeführt. Es waren Angehörige der Rechts- und Ausführungsorgane, die ermöglicht haben, dass Menschen wegen willfähriger Äußerungen einer Vernichtung zugeführt wurden. Es waren Angehörige der Rechtsorgane die durch ihr Handeln verhindert haben, dass einstige Täter sich der Rechenschaftspflicht ihres Handels entziehen konnten. Das Entstehen eines Unrechtssystem ist demgemäß immer eine Folge des unreflektierten Handelns von Rechts- und Ausführungsorganen. Die Missachtung einer bindenden Anwendung und Einklagbarkeit von grundgesetzlichen Kernbestimmungen für Geschädigte des Rechtssystem dokumentiert geradezu exemplarisch das unreflektierte Handeln von Rechtsorganen wie im vorliegenden Fall des Verfassungsgerichts und bestätigt, den von Hannah Arendt und Fritz Bauer artikulierte Unwillen des deutschen Rechtssystems, sich der Verantwortung gegenüber der eigenen belasteten Vergangenheit zu stellen.

Wir erleben bereits heute wieder eine abnehmende Sensibilisierung gegenüber Menschenrechtsverletzungen und dem Leid von Opfern (siehe jüngste Vorkommnisse um Asylsuchende bei der Hamburger Bundespolizei). Dies ist zweifellos eine Folge der Nichtwahrnehmung von Verantwortung durch Verfassungs-, Rechts- und Ausführungsorganen. Nehmen sie nun endlich, 70 Jahre nach der belasteten Vergangenheit der Rechts- und Ausführungsorgane, ihre ethische und moralische Verpflichtung an, den Mechanismen des Wiederentstehens eines Unrechtssystem unabdingbar entgegen zu treten und nehmen sie die Verantwortung wahr, welche ihnen von den Grundgesetzgebern mit einer expliziten Verpflichtung übertragen wurde. Wenn diese Verpflichtung vom Bundesverfassungsgericht nicht wahrgenommen wird, dann muss zweifellos deren Daseinsberechtigung hinterfragt werden.

Die Weltgeschehnisse verlangen eine klare und unmissverständliche Stellungnahme zu ethischer und moralischer Verantwortungswahrnehmung.

Ich ersuche das Verfassungsgericht die Zulässigkeit meiner Verfassungsbeschwerde zu bestätigen und einer Entscheidung zuzuführen.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Abe Treiner

Nehmen Sie sich 30 Sekunden Zeit und unterschreiben Sie die Petition jetzt!
       
http://www.change.org/p/bundesverfassungsgericht-der-bundesrepublik-deutschland-ich-ersuche-das-verfassungsgericht-die-zulässigkeit-meiner-verfassungsbeschwerde-zu-bestätigen-und-einer-entscheidung-zuzuführen
        

Relevante Links:

http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/openletter2constitutionalcourtgermany20.html

  

http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/openletter2constitutionalcourtgermanyen.html

http://constitutionalcomplaintgermany2015.blogspot.com/2015/03/verfassungsbeschwerde-deutschland-2015.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_11.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_8.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/02/veroffentlichen-eines-offenen-briefes.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/08/offener-brief-das-amtsgericht-munchen.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/07/offenerbrief-zum-thema-wennsich.html

Petition2ConstitutionalCourtGermanyEn_201506

Abe Treiner   *   Leopoldstraße 124   *   D-80802 München
Bundesverfassungsgericht Postfach 1771 76006 Karlsruhe
		München, 14. Juni 2015

This petition is aimed to the
Constitutional Court of the Federal Republic of Germany

„We are not only responsible for what we do but also for what we not do“
― Molière

„So is the difference between traditional and modern falsehood
basically only on the difference between hiding and destruction.“
― Hannah Arendt

„When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.“

― Berthold Brecht

Dear President of the Constitutional Court,

Dear Mr Prof. Dr. Voßkuhle,

Dear readers and recipients listed in the attachment,

on the experiences from the system of injustice the constitutional lawmakers explicitly stated the claim on unrestricted legal process based on article 34 GG. The reason for this was undoubtedly that the re-establishment of an injustice system can be approached effectively only by this standards. If the prevention of a re-establishment of an injustice system would be only bounded by incalculable costs, then such a claim would be doomed to failure from the beginning.

Accordingly for errors of law caused by judicial and executive authorities, the barriers to the enforcement of legal claims contradicts those constitutional requirements. The constitutional lawmakers also manifested with chapter 19 para 2/4 GG the inviolability of the essence of the constitutional rights. Even because of the experiences with the system of injustice, the constitutional lawmakers delegated the responsibility and control of the core constitutional rights to the Constitutional Court in order to ensure that these basic laws will be absolutely safeguarded by this institution. Thus the constitutional lawmakers manifested a compulsion to act to the Constitutional Court as soon as it becomes aware of violations of the core constitutional rights.

The world community identified once as being characteristic of a system of injustice the fact of preventing the enforcement of legal claims for errors of law caused by judicial and executive authorities. In the underlying proceedings was the failure of the courts of lower instances and involved judicial and executive authorities recognized and clearly and unequivocally addressed by the judge of the District Court of Munich. The judge identified not only a disregarding for the law principle 'no punishment without crime' but addressed also the abusive usage of mechanisms which let undoubtedly detect associations with the system of injustice.

The philosopher Hannah Arendt has ascribed the establishment of injustice systems on largely unreflected acts by members of the judicial and executive authorities. It were members of the judicial and executive authorities, who had supplied people to annihilation for non-assimilated statements. It were members of the judicial authorities which have prevented by their acts, that former culprits could escape the accountability of their doings. The establishment of a system of injustice is accordingly always a result of unreflected actions by judicial and executive authorities. The disregarding of a binding implementation and enforceability of core constitutional regulations for victim of the legal system documenting almost exemplarily the unreflected actions by legal institutions such as in this case the Constitutional Court and confirmed the reluctance of the German judicial authorities taking responsibility towards their own burdened history stated by Hannah Arendt and Fritz Bauer.

We are experiencing today again decreasing awareness of violations of human rights and the suffering of victims (see recent occurrences of asylum seekers within the Hamburg-based German Federal Police). This is undoubtedly due to the non-perception of responsibility of the constitutional, judicial and executive authorities. Please perceive finally now, 70 years after the burdened history of the judicial and executive authorities, your ethical and moral obligation, to counter effectively the mechanisms of the re-establishment of a system of injustice and accept the responsibilities which was given you by the constitutional lawmakers with an explicit obligation. If this obligation is not perceived by the Federal Constitutional Court, then the reason of its existing must be definitely a case of a critical analysis.

The world affairs requiring a clear and unequivocal statement of ethical and moral responsibility perceptions.

I'm asking the Constitutional Court to confirm the acceptation of my constitutional complaint and to lead the matter to a decision of a judicial nature.

With kind regards

Abe Treiner

Take now 30 seconds and sign the petition!

http://www.change.org/p/constitutional-court-of-the-federal-republic-of-germany-i-m-asking-the-constitutional-court-to-confirm-the-acceptation-of-my-constitutional-complaint-and-to-lead-the-matter-to-a-decision-of-a-judicial-nature

Related Links:

http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/openletter2constitutionalcourtgermanyen.html

http://openletter2judiciary.blogspot.com/2015/06/openletter2constitutionalcourtgermany20.html

http://constitutionalcomplaintgermany2015.blogspot.com/2015/03/verfassungsbeschwerde-deutschland-2015.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_11.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_8.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/02/veroffentlichen-eines-offenen-briefes.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/08/offener-brief-das-amtsgericht-munchen.html

http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/07/offenerbrief-zum-thema-wennsich.html

OpenLetter2ConstitutionalCourtGermanyEn_201506

Abe Treiner   *   Leopoldstraße 124   *   D-80802 München
Bundesverfassungsgericht Postfach 1771 76006 Karlsruhe
		München, 14. Juni 2015

Open-Letter to

Constitutional Court of Germany

Dear Mr Gaier,

Dear Mrs König,

Dear Mr Paulus,

Dear Mr Landau,

Dear Mrs Kessal-Wulf,

Dear Mr Schluckebier,

Dear readers and recipients listed in the attachment,

Dear President of the Federal Republic of Germany,

in this country we arrogate to call for rule of law in other countries, when we receive knowledge of occurrences, which we consider to be incompatible with our moral concepts. These, our superciliousness can only be maintained by us if we fully complying our constitutional obligations and ensuring that common occurrences in this country which also disregarding the rule of law, will be transferred to an essentially lawful inspection.

The fully compliance with this constitutional principle was bequeathed us by the writers of the constitutional law as obligatory duty after the experiences of the system of injustice. This means that for judicial authorities and in particular for the ultima ratio instance of the Constitutional Court a compulsion to act exists if faults in the legal system are detected, which has to be transferred to a public clarification and future prevention in order to avoid a repetition of our history. The violation of these principle have been resulted to the monstrous occurrences of our history. This awareness must determine our ethical and moral standards.

As well the disregarding of these principle of the rule of law shows today again the consequences which making the reconstruction of a system of injustice not unrealistic. As examples should be mentioned the abuses of police violence, the recognizable entanglement of judicial and executive authorities within NSU³ activities and the recent occurrences of inhuman treatment of asylum-seeker³⁴ by policemen which seems to cover occurrences from concentration camps with a similar dimension of inhuman treatment.

Nearly 15000 abuse cases of police violence has been identified in the period from 2009 to 2011 by respectable institutions, such as Süddeutsche Zeitung and Amnesty International. Extrapolated until today, nearly 50000 cases must be considered in its whole extent. Such increasing can't be no longer determined as regrettable isolated cases.

3 NSU-Morde

34 Exzesse Bundespolizei

 

  ^{7 10 16 25 26}

7 Michael Siegel

10 Volksgerichtshof

16 People's Court Germany

25 Bundesarchiv Bild 151-39-23 Volksgerichtshof

26 Bundesarchiv Bild183-R99542 Judenverfolgung, Michael Siegel

In my constitutional complaint underlying proceedings, was the failure of the courts of lower instances and involved judicial and executive authorities recognized by the judge Mrs Ehrl of the District Court of Munich clearly and unequivocally addressed. The judge Mrs Ehrl identified not only a disregarding for the law principle 'no punishment without crime' but addressed also the abusive usage of mechanisms which let undoubtedly detect associations with the 'Treachery Act'^{12 14} of system of injustice. The judge Mrs Ehrl was almost appalled that such mechanisms will be considered again by unreflected practice from judicial and executive authorities regarding its burdened history. If this doesn't cause a need for reconnaissance and disposal of this system error (identified within our legal system) then there will be no doubt that we are already standing on a one-way street to a system of injustice, which may have reached already an irreversible stage. The constitutional lawmakers have stated for such a constellation explicitly section 20 subsection 4 GG and thus unequivocally committed to perceive our and specially the Constitutional Court's responsibility. This perception of our responsibility committed us more than ever, if courts acting seemingly by constitutional rituals trying to convey an image of rule of law. The criterion for the classification of a system of justice or a system of injustice can only be based on a binding implementation and enforceability of core constitutional regulations. The guiding principle of the constitutional lawmakers was without a doubt to become manifest a compulsion of acting to the Constitutional Court, whenever the potential of a re-establishment of an injustice system may not be disqualified by acts from judicial and executive authorities essentially. A perception of this responsibility by the Constitutional Court definitely cannot be abandoned, because the scientific historical research has identified the unreflected acting of judicial and executive authorities as significant cause of all injustice systems established on German territory.

12 Treachery Act of 1934

14 Heimtückegesetz

 

Everywhere in the world a prevented justiciability of legal faults caused by judicial or executive authorities will be regarded as characteristics of a system of injustice. These by the Constitutional Court ignored constitutional standards shows unfortunately until today those mechanisms of reluctance of the German legal system to taking over responsibility towards their own burdened history, substantiated by the philosopher Hannah Arendt^{8 9} and the jurist Fritz Bauer^{1 2}. This refusal of acceptance of responsibility by judicial and executive authorities and their disregard of binding constitutional terms bequeath the impression of a mockery of the victims of the system of injustice as it conveys a hopelessness to proceed effectively against a re-establishment of a system of injustice. The refusal of accepting of verifiability of legal faults caused by judicial and executive authorities conveys an impression that the Constitutional Court would consider similar occurrences within the system of injustice as legitimated, only misinterpreted procedures which are consistent with the constitution. This is intolerable and shows once again the arrogant self-righteousness of German Jurists, which once were paraded within show trial by judges in the system of injustice before the eyes of the people of the world. The people of the World had once identified the practice of prevention of legal hearings for victims as core characterization of an injustice system. If the Constitutional Court applying today the same approach, then it still shows the since 70 years lasting sustained missing ability of reflecting their own behavior which will not be whitewashed by performances with red flowing robes.

 

8 Hannah Arendt

9 Hannah Arendt

1 Fritz Bauer

2 Fritz Bauer

 

 ^{15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24}

15 Bundesverfassungsgericht

18 Federal Constitutional Court of Germany

19 Portrait Gaier

20 Portrait Paulus

21 Portrait Schluckebier

22 Portrait Kessal-Wulf

23 Portrait König

24 Portrait Landau

As I'm seeing myself confronted with inappropriate actions from executive authorities with this matter repeatedly, I may prompt the Constitutional Court to prevent the re-establishment of a system on injustice by discharging its responsibility. Therefore I'm requesting the Constitutional Court to accept the constitutionally mandatory claim for clarification and reviewing of the legal fault by verifying the matter against the conformity with constitutional core terms. The initiators of the constitutional rules had the expectations that the Constitutional Court should be committed of the compliance with the constitutional core terms and not to comparatively lapidary topics such as the 'headscarf ban for teachers in public schools'. If judicial and executive authorities especially the last instance of the Constitutional Court not perceiving their responsibility because of their own burdened history, then this refused responsibility perception must be covered by all others. This we owe it to the victims of three German injustice systems and must be and stay for all eternity our obligatory guiding principle. As a result of the postulate of my perception of a historical responsibility an unjustified refusal of my constitutional complaint cannot be accepted by me. In this case, my perception of responsibility would be to bring the hazard of a reincarnation of a German injustice system by the unreflected activities from judicial and executive authorities before the world's eyes. It's always terrifying and shocking at the same time how members of those organizations which have had once significantly contributed to the establishment of the system of injustice seem to argue out against their consequent responsibility and obviously seem to be strive to relativize, trivialize, minimize and to whitewash the activities of judicial and executive authorities which undoubtedly comes to the potential of a re-establishment of an injustice system. 

I assure you that I have the Lutheran's determination to oppose to seemingly overpowering opponents. Also it's my unwavering guiding principle never idly standing by, while an injustice system will be re-established and demanding an absolute perception of responsibility by protagonists of such ambitions. If the fate of Sophie Scholl^{5 6}, the count of Stauffenberg^{13 17} or Georg Elser^{4 11} should me catching up, then I've provided already arrangements, to make the background of the case aware to a world public opinion.For this case, I would like already now to put an inquiry to the President of the Federal Republic of Germany to disengage my German citizenship posthumously. I would not like to be perceived after my life as a member of this State, for which I felt ashamed because of the non-perception of its historical responsibility during whole of my life.

5 Sophie Scholl

6 Sophie Scholl

13 Claus von Stauffenberg

17 Claus von Stauffenberg

4 Georg Elser

11 Georg Elser

With kind regards

Abe Treiner

Picture and document references
1)   http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Bauer

2)   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Bauer

3)   http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSU-Morde

4)   http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Elser

5)   http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl

6)   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl

7)   http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Siegel

8)   http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt

9)   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt

10) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksgerichtshof

11) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Georg_Elser

12) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treachery_Act_of_1934

13) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_von_Stauffenberg

14) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimt%C3%BCckegesetz

15) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesverfassungsgericht

16) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Court_%28Germany%29

17) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_Schenk_Graf_von_Stauffenberg

18) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Constitutional_Court_of_Germany

19) Portrait_Gaier Bundesverfassungsgericht lorenz.fotodesign, Karlsruhe

20) Portrait_Paulus Bundesverfassungsgericht lorenz.fotodesign, Karlsruhe

21) Portrait_Schluckebier Bundesverfassungsgericht lorenz.fotodesign, Karlsruhe

22) Portrait_Kessal-Wulf Bundesverfassungsgericht lorenz.fotodesign, Karlsruhe

23) Portrait_König Bundesverfassungsgericht lorenz.fotodesign, Karlsruhe

24) Portrait_Landau Bundesverfassungsgericht lorenz.fotodesign, Karlsruhe

25) Bundesarchiv_Bild_151-39-23,_Volksgerichtshof,_Reinecke,_Freisler,_Lautz

26) Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-R99542,_München,_Judenverfolgung,_Michael_Siegel

27) http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/07/offenerbrief-zum-thema-wennsich.html

28) http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/02/veroffentlichen-eines-offenen-briefes.html

29) http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen.html

30) http://openletter2ragregorrose.blogspot.com/2014/05/offener-brief-rechtsanwalt-gregor-rose.html

31) http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2013/08/offener-brief-das-amtsgericht-munchen.html

32) http://abtmuc-myconception-eng.blogspot.de/2014/06/my-self-conception-about-responsibility.html

33) http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_8.html

34) http://abtmuc-myconception-ger.blogspot.de/2014/06/mein-selbstverstandnis-aufgrund-unserer.html

35) http://openletter2amtsgermuc.blogspot.com/2014/09/offener-brief-das-landgericht-munchen_11.html

36) http://constitutionalcomplaintgermany2015.blogspot.de/2015/03/verfassungsbeschwerde-deutschland-2015.html

37) http://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/hannover_weser-leinegebiet/Fluechtlinge-in-Polizeizelle-erniedrigt,misshandlung136.html