Criminal proceedings
On September 22nd 1999 I delivered to the law enforcement procedures a notification about suspicion from commission of crime by a person who robbed me. (Annex 8)
I wanted to authorities prosecuting the offender and punish him to commit to a compensation or property damage. After the authorities verified the truth of the statements found in my notice, they turned 180 degrees and they began to defend the perpetrator of this crime. Defense of the offender was carried by delays in the proceedings, through obstruction of the proceedings, unauthorized postponement of the notice of the crime, unauthorized stopping of prosecution, altering the testimony of a witness against me, which interfered with my civil honor and reputation and also a loophole in the law for prosecution.
Between 1999 and 2007 the police delayed my initiative two times and three times stopped the prosecution. (Annex 11) The prosecution was finally stopped 12.10.2007 (Annex 1)
The investigation and prosecution continued only after the intervention of senior prosecutor, because the supervising prosecutor has always rejected my complaint against the decision of the Hearing Officer. On 2 December 2002 I delivered to Inspection Service Department of the Interior Ministry the notification of abuse of authority against the Hearing Officer, because Hearing officer changed testimony of witness and in resolution of the criminal proceedings she wrote false claims that hit in my civic honor and reputation. (Annex 9) The Regional Department of the Ministry of Interior, Office of Inspection Service in Banska Bystrica issued Resolution File No.: ČVS:UIS-294/1BB-PO-2002, dated January 7th 2003 after investigating my notice. According to this resolution, the Hearing Officer was for non-procedural repair in testimony of witness given to Disciplinary Action Director of the District Police Office of the Judicial Police in Banska Bystrica. (Annex 10)
Then I turned to the prosecution to restore my rights violated and canceled the resolution, which interferes with my civic honor and reputation, because this resolution used the defendant's legal representative in civil proceedings. (Annex 15)
Even after several multiple initiatives (Checklist 13) the General Prosecutor my stimulus unreasonably delayed, while using the § 34 paragraph 2 of the Law on Prosecution no. 153/2001 Z.z.. According these Law the next stimulus repeated the same things is dealt with by senior prosecutor referred to in paragraph 1 only if it contains new information. (Annex 14)
I filed a complaint against the prosecutor who put down my last complaint. Law enforcement authorities still do not act on this submission. (Annex 16)
Law enforcement authorities instead or restore my property rights, because I was robbed, violated my right to personal honor and reputation by order Hearing officer. These my rights were not restored even now.
In criminal proceedings the prosecution and the police did not protect rights of victim, but defended property of the wealthy perpetrator of political circles acquired through criminal acts and thus became an accomplice in the crime.
It follows that the Slovak Republic has violated my rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in these articles:
Article 23.
Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:
(a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;
(b) To ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy;
(c) To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.
Article 17
1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 26
All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
Civil proceedings
In civil proceedings, I asked the Court to declare the contract of sale, which I was robbed, is invalid. I justify the proposal by hen evaluation by court expert Ing. Orszag. (Annex 17) Because the defendant has also submitted an expert opinion of MVDr. Harvan, which only had two pages, and was without evidence, I asked the court to appoint an inspection report, if it has doubts about the correctness of a court expert evaluation of laying hens, which I presented. (Annex 18)
The court, after a lot of useless hearings and discontinuances of proceedings, dimissed my proposal, without inspection report being made??. (Checklist 5)My attorney appealed against the ruling which I supplemented on January 19, 2008. (Annex 19)
The presiding judge of the Court of Appeal in the case did not allow me to speak properly by interruping me and saying facts that I did not say and were contrary to my appeal. I could only answer questions not related to my appeal and were irrelevant to the decision. From the questions I was asked at the hearing by judges one may conclude that the court had not studied the file to be decided. The same can be said about the final speech, when there were these things contrary to the evidence that were in the court file.
Finally, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, without having to deal with an appeal that I filed. After the hearing, I filed a complaint dated 29.08.2008 for the violation of the principles of the dignity of the trial by judges at the hearing. Unsuccessfully. (Annex 4)
Remedies
Because the procedure of the Court of First Instance and Court of Appeal prevented me to act in court, I filed an appeal against the decision. The Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic has refused my appeal, by using a loophole in the Civil Procedure on appeal, that it is not possible to invoke the Court of Appeal against the decision if the appeal court confirms the judgment of the Court and advised to not admit the possibility of appeal. The vindication stated it did not deal with the content of appeal. (Annex 3)
I filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic against the decision of refusing my appeal for violation of my rights of fair trial. The Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic has used a loophole in the law No. 38/1993 about the organization of the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic, about the hearing and on the status of judges of the Constitutional Court. The § 25 par. 2 of the Act. 38/1993 second sentence: The Constitutional Court may reject the proposal, which is clearly unfounded. The reasons stated, the substance of the complaint was not dealt with. (Annex 2)
In civil proceedings the court did not protect rights of victim, but defended property of the wealthy perpetrator of political circles acquired through criminal acts and thus became an accomplice in thecrime.
It follows that the Slovak Republic has violated my rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in particular:
Article 23. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:
(a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;
(b) To ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; (c) To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.
Article 14
1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The press and the public may be excluded from all or part of a trial for reasons of morals, public order (ordre public) or national security in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice; but any judgement rendered in a criminal case or in a suit at law shall be made public except where the interest of juvenile persons otherwise requires or the proceedings concern matrimonial disputes or the guardianship of children.
Article 26
All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
The European Court of Human Rights
Finally, I turned to complain to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. The Court has used a loophole in the rules of procedure and my complaint declared unacceptable. (Annex 6) It did not knowthat Law No. 99/1963, Civil Procedure Code and Law No. 38/1993 about the organization of the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic, hearing before it and on the status of judges is incompatible with the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms. (Annex 7)
It follows that the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, violated my rights guaranteed by the Charter of the Council of Europe, Convention of Human Rights of European Union.
Constitutional officials
I turned also to the political representatives to propose to the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic start acting on the conformity with the laws and the compliance provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure on appeal and its interpretation by the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic with the Constitution and international conventions. The institutions eligible to submit a proposal of the Constitutional Court to initiate proceedings of alignment rejected my ideas. (Annex 20)
Based on the above, we ask for moral support and expert advice.
Moral support you can provide on this petition
I am disabled pensioners in poverty, which needs for its fight for their rights also financial assistance.
Financial assistance you can give this account:
000000-0390032955/0900IBAN: SK7409000000000390032955 BIC: GIBASKBX
Sincerely, "the human rights to peace and happiness in the world"
Ing. Štefan Štefanides
Cintorínska 240/13
991 06 Želovce
Slovak republic
email: ates@mail.t-com.sk
phone number: 0421907825124
