Ovi -
we cover every issue
newsletterNewsletter
subscribeSubscribe
contactContact
searchSearch
Poverty - Homeless  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
Stop human trafficking
Ovi Language
Books by Avgi Meleti
The Breast Cancer Site
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
Stop human trafficking
 
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
GermanGreekEnglishSpanishFinnishFrenchItalianPortugueseSwedish
Protection of Human Rights at International Organizations - only a Fiction? (Part III) Protection of Human Rights at International Organizations - only a Fiction? (Part III)
by Frantisek Brychta
2009-02-03 09:49:46
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon

Introduction

This article continues my previous article with the same title “Protection of Human Rights at International Organizations – only a Fiction”? You can find my last article on the web pages (see hyperlink http://www.ovimagazine.com/art/2561). My articles are dealing with the difficulties connected with the enforcement of human rights at the institutions established for their protection.

The aim the articles is to make readers acquainted with the way in which my complaints concerning violations of human rights have been handled by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and by the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights of the United Nations Organization. Firstly I stress that I can duly document all the statements and facts given in my articles by documentary proofs.

Procedure before the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights


First of all, I will give a short summary of what preceded to the procedure before the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights of the United Nations Organization. The origin of my efforts and applications to the international institutions lies in the Court ruling of the Constitution Court of the Czech Republic File No. I. ÚS 200/95 of 25 April 1996. In this
Court ruling the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic decided on the Court ruling of the Regional Court Brno File No. 12Co 17/93. However, my constitutional complaint registered under File No. I. ÚS 200/96 was submitted against the Judgement of the Regional Court Brno File No. 12Co 452/91. It is obvious, even for the person without education in law, that the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic itself has violated my right to a fair trial.

Since 1996 my constitutional complaint of the Judgement of the Regional Court Brno File No. 12Co 452/91 has not been duly decided. Described situation has been contrary not only to the laws of the Czech Republic but also contrary to the international conventions by which the Czech Republic has been bound. For that reason I turned primarily to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. I am sorry to say, the unflattering statements presented in many articles about the European Court of Human Rights have been proven true.

I can document by documentary proofs that the European Court of Human Rights has not been concerned with the content and subject of my complaint in my case at all. Also obvious inconsolable situation in the matter of registration and record-keeping of the complaints is evident from the documentation received from the European Court of Human Rights. The bad situation in the matter of registration and recordkeeping of the complaints significantly decreases probability that submitted complaint (application) will be duly and fairly heard (e. g. giving wrong dates, enclosing of other sent unrelated complaints (applications) as Enclosures to the previous complaint (application), and so on).

To this very day I have not received from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg a decision whether my right to a fair trial has been or has not been violated as a consequence of above described procedure of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic. With regard to the fact that my application for remedy had not been met by the European Court, I turned with described matter to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2006.
This petition was registered by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights under No. 1618/2007.

To this very day I have not received any decision from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights whether my right to a fair trial has been or has not been violated by the procedure of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic.

Letter to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg of 25 November
2008 File No. 22750/05


On 18 November 2008 the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg took a decision on a complaint (application) which I have never submitted. The decision has been taken under
File No. 22750/2005.

1. In the letter of the European Court of 10 June 2008 File No. 22750/05 (delivered in a form personal delivery) I am informed that the European Court registers, under File No. 2750/05, my complaint of the body of public authority of the Czech Republic which has not taken its decision within a reasonable time.

In the letter the European Court asks whether I have enforced damages according to amended Act No. 82/1998 Coll., on responsibility of the State for the damage caused within the performance of public authority by its decision or incorrect official procedure – the amendment of this act came into operation in the Czech Republic on 27 April 2006.

2. In registered letter of 28 July 2008 I call the attention of the European Court that I have not submitted the complaint given in the letter of the European Court of Human Rights of
10 June 2008 File No. 227050/05.

Since I have justifiable doubts about correct registration and record-keeping of my other complaints (applications) at this Court I asked them in this letter for sending of a list of my complaints (applications) registered by this Court since 1996. To this very day my application has not been met yet.

3. In the letter of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg of 25 November 2008
File No. 22750/05 I am informed that my complaint (registered since 2005) under File
No. 22750/05 was rejected on 18 November 2008.

Above described facts confirm again statements presented in many articles about the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. These articles point out absolutely inconsolable and horrible situation in the matter of registration and keeping files of the complaints (applications). Wrong registration and wrong keeping files of the complaints (applications) in themselves impeach that submitted complaints (applications) will be heard duly and fairly.

Conclusion

I have received no duly justified decision on my duly submitted complaints from the
European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, even not from the Office of High Commissioner of Human Rights. To this very day I have not received from these institutions any decision whether my right to a fair trial has been or has not been violated in consequence of the fact that the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic has not decided on my constitutional complaint submitted against the Judgement of the Regional Court Brno File No. 12Co 452/91.

On the contrary, in 2008 I received from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg a decision on a complaint (application) which I have not submitted.

On the basis of above given facts I justifiably consider the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights useless institutions which bring nothing to anybody, nor are helpful within the protection of human rights. Thus I consider financial means from tax payers expended for the operating of these useless institutions which operate only formally as financial means which are wasted.

*********************************************************************

Part I - Part II - Part III - Part IV -


  
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Comments(19)
Get it off your chest
Name:
Comment:
 (comments policy)

Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 10:36:09
This is pretty sad stuff indeed but not very surprising within the sorry times in which we live where men are willing to sell their spiritual and intellectual inheritance for a dish of lentils or a fistful of dollars and euro, as the case may be. It seems to me too that it is an exercise in futility to succumb to a mindless activism which multiplies institutions that allegedly protect human rights if one does not truly believe in the concept of INALIENABLE human rights; that is to say the idea that those rights are not granted by any state or institutions, nor can they in principle be taken away by them, but are integral part of being human, a son and daughter of a loving Father who cares for all his/her creatures and creation. The disrespect for nature is a logical consequence of the disrespect for the Creator. I am afraid that without that little adjective (i.e., inalienable: an adjective unknown to Antiquity) one is bound to be disappointed by institutions time and again.


AP2009-02-03 12:30:57
The European Court of Human Rights doesn't work right and does not protect the interests of european citizens and immigrants. On the other hand, the European institutions don't intervene enough in the matter of Justice in its member states. There are many European countries where Justice doesn't work and my home country is one of them. People are disappointed with the European Justice institutions, and the ones who believe in God are disappointed too.


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 15:32:15
Alas, we are all disappointed, including God. Neverthless Plato would aver that the concepts of justice and of inalianable rights remain shining outside the cave.


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 15:38:29
P.S. As commented under the poem by Mr. Yuri a couple of days ago: self-knowledge is a special kind of knowledge and can become more precise than knowledge of nature when man attempts (without always succeeding, alas)to understand himself via the artifacts and institution he has created, i.e., via history. The alas is neede since quite ofter man does not heed the lessons of history (as made by him/her)and ends up repeating it. Tho thyself before bringing justice to others is still valid today, I dare say.




Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 15:39:51
Errata: know thyself.


AP2009-02-03 17:15:04
I know myself and I know others, and that doesn't change the fact that Justice does not function as it should in Europe and that it disappoints many people (don't know if it disappoints God, I could never ask him).
To say the truth, I think that Justice works much better in the U.S. (if we ignore the issue of death penalty) than in Southern or Eastern Europe for example (but I'm not excluding some Northern countries). And everybody knows that a democracy is not a democracy if Justice does not work.


AP2009-02-03 17:18:20
Now Mr. Paparella, since you don't live in Europe and it doesn't affect you that much - I suppose the matter doesn't have a great importance for you. I think it is important and pertinent - and only men can fix it, I'm not seing God intervening in European courts, I don't know why.


AP2009-02-03 17:25:14
If God could be a witness, of course, then all court cases would be easily and much more quickly solved. But then, why would someone who creates crimes and criminals agree to help in solving court cases, or in fixing Justice for that matter?


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 18:44:20
Ah, fixing justice. If there is no ultimate judge to appeal to, I am afraid that is what can be expected. Surely we'll have some naturally just men, such as Socrates, but the majority will be "fixing" for themselves. I repeat, the concept of inalienable rights makes no sense without a belief in God, aside from the charade of placing it in a constitution while holding slaves...I am afraid that with no inalienable rights, we are all at the mercy of institutions and states that, nobless oblige, grant and/or withold rights.


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 18:52:22
P.S. As far as not living in Europe, to the contrary I have lived and studied for prolonged periods of time in Europe (for a total of 15 years or so), I visit frequently since I have a mother and sister who live there and I believe in M.L. King's dictum that an injustice done to one man is an injustice done to all men, especially since I also believe that fraternitè, libertè, egalitè is a rather hallow slogan without the Fatherhood of God which makes us brothers.


AP2009-02-03 19:40:37
"but the majority will be "fixing" for themselves"
No, I don't believe that and I believe that efficient Justice is possible, with or without God.

"injustice done to one man is an injustice done to all men"
To believe in this, one doesn't have to believe in God. Is God a judge or a law maker? Plus: does He punish anyone in this life?(I mean people who actually deserve it, not innocent ones) For God sake, why so much trouble - why did God create crimes and criminals in the first place, if he's the only one able to solve things?
If you lived in Europe and have family living in Europe, then you should recognize our concerns.


AP2009-02-03 20:06:36
Yes, sure, if we had God in our Constitutions, everything would be different then (and the States are a good example of that, I suppose?).
Anyway, what I meant was: it's preferable to have an excessive zeal than to leave Justice undone.


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 20:23:50
You are quite right, God could have predetermined and created us without freedom and then we'd have no criminals and no crimes either and nobody would be disappointed in Utopia or lala land as the case may be, but unfortunately we would then all be predetermined automatons.


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-03 22:04:48
P.S. Ultimately we will be judged not but how much activism we employed in building up justice in theory but "what you did to the least of your brethren" in practice. Did we feed them, did we clothe them, did we instruct them, did we visit them in jail? I do not believe that all the activism in the world will ever save anyone especially it will not save the "limousine liberal."


AP2009-02-05 00:15:42
Oh, so we have criminals and crimes because we have freedom, not because we have some fellow humans who are criminals - in a minute you'll be defending dictatorships as means to prevent crimes.
What activism? I'm just giving my opinion. If that's activism, be it. No, I don't want to go to heaven nor be judged for not feeding, clothing or visiting serial killers, pedophiles, white collar criminals or domestic agressors in prison, sorry?!! Goodness gracious!!


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-05 05:46:46
You missed the point Ms. Pereira. What ought to have been the obvious point of what I wrote is that we have crimes and criminals not because God gave us freedom of will but because we have abuses of freedom, but nevertheless God will not take away the use because of its abuses (the excuse found by those who would deny Her/Him) because without freedom love is also impossible. It appears in fact that love is the point of it all. As Dante aptly puts it in the very last line of the Divine Comedy, the human enterprise and destiny is about "the love that moves the sun and the other stars."


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-05 15:23:36
P.S. Moreover, the reason why some 90% of the world's constitutions mention a deity in their preamble is to anchor rights not in raw political power but in a place which is beyond mere power. Not to do so is to be left to the mercy of the whim of states and institutions with no appeal whatsoever, even in the case of international law. Not to do so is to go back to the good old days of the Greeks and Romans who hadn't the foggiest of what an inalienable right was all about and tolerated slavery. I dare say that the 10% of sovereign states who do not place a deity in the preamble of their constitutions are not only not progressive, they are actually regressive. Voltaire who even in his sarcasm remained an intelligent man used to say that if there were no God one would have to be invented. Indeed, he knew men too well to trust them with the guaranteeing of constitutional rights.


AP2009-02-05 15:54:27
Emanuel Paparella 2009-02-03 20:23:50
"God could have predetermined and created us without freedom and then we'd have no criminals and no crimes"

Emanuel Paparella 2009-02-05 15:23:36
"world's constitutions mention a deity in their preamble is to anchor rights not in raw political power but in a place which is beyond mere power. Not to do so is to be left to the mercy of the whim of states and institutions with no appeal whatsoever, even in the case of international law."
Well, one IS left to those anyway!!


Emanuel Paparella2009-02-05 17:22:17
I'll side with Voltaire on that one.


© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi