• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
MKapoustinPage 1 of 25March 14, 2006
To:Republic of BulgariaSupreme Administrative CourtFifth SectionChairmanRef:Administrative Case 8828/2005Trial:May 2nd 2006 at 14:30 hrs.
Respondent:Republic of BulgariaМинистерство на правосъдиетоУл. „Славянска” №София, 1000
Pleadings
To The Chairman of the Court,На основание чл. 4 и 5 от ГПК Моля Председател да разпорежда превод отАнглийски на този
ПЛЕДОАРИЯ
от
 
преводача по дело 8828/2005г. вещи лицаМариана Русева Радулова в.л. № 1118 по списъка на специалистите, утвърдени завещи лица от Комисията по чл. 200ж ал. 1, ЗСВ, обн. Д.В. бр. 17/2004г..
Opening Statement
For the record, the Applicant would underscore to this Court not to undervalue the complexityof the Applicants complaints and the seriousness of his allegations.Furthermore, the Court is request not to limit its judicial enquiry only to the exact words foundin the provisions of 
item 4 of LC 4-277/02
and their application by the Respondent to thenarrow question of direct discrimination in spheres of prison housing or employment whenapplied to prisoners who are not citizens of the Republic of Bulgaria. To so severely limit this judicial enquiry would ignoring the overwhelming evidence of how the Respondent’s ordersto “isolate from all others” and words that of Respondent officials civil legal and human rightsabuses that have resulted from the “incitement to discrimination” caused by
item 4 of LC 4-277/02
. Sofia prison officials “a result of the Respondent’s use of two phrases. The first, thatthose not having Bulgarian nationality are, “
to be isolated from all others
” and the second,that “ this be a further injustice and would. only examine the This court is being asked to unravel 17 years of published and unpublishedadministrative acts issued by officials of the Respondent and unlawfully abusing thefundamental civil and human rights of hundreds of foreign citizens imprisoned in Bulgaria’s prisons since 1991. There is a real need for a full hearing of the facts, and that no matter howlong this proceeding may take.
19313976.doc
 
MKapoustinPage 2 of 25March 14, 2006Furthermore, the Court is requested to consider the Applicant’s complaints and argumentswithin the factual context of his having experienced more than 2 years of a brutal isolation indetention and the additional 9 years of the harsh conditions to be found at the Sofia CentralPrison. The negative human and social consequences of such a life, the psychological affectsof isolation at a maximum security penitentiary facility for nearly 11 years and the resultingseparation from family and society are also not to be underestimated.Also, when examining the facts and collected evidence the members of this Court arerequested to do so within the additional context of the now notoriously public fact of howdetermined Sofia prison officials can be when undermining the democratic principles of  public transparency and the judicial accountability. The Court asked to recall the letters issued by the Respondent’s former Minister for Justice Anton Stankov Respondent officials in November and Deputy Minister Margarit Ganev in December 2004 and the August letter Deputy Director for the Main Directorate for the Execution of Punishments PlamenKodstadinov and November 2005 letter of Director for the Ministry for Justice Directorate for International Legal Aid Ms. Vassilena Malev. Each of them defending the Sofia prison practice of official secrecy and incidents, the criminal indictments and recent dismissals that itis well documented fact that Sofia prison official historically refuse to explain their administrative acts to foreign prisoners. And if issuing a written administrative act or explanation, the written motives of prison officials are so vague or the facts so convoluted asto be incomprehensible to the reader. This particularly true when the party negatively affected by the administrative act is a foreign citizen who can neither reads, writes or speaks Bulgaria.The Court is also The withholding of information and official documents from prisoners by prison officials Concealment of official administrative documents, and lack of officialaccountability has been historically supported by officials of the Respondent, It now a matter of record that senior Sofia prison officials and certain official at the Main Directorate for theExecution of Punishments and formerly employed at the Sofia prison did actively engage inthe concealment of how inhumanely they administered criminal sentences. Historically,Officials at the Sofia prison refuse to be bound by Bulgaria’s national laws. A fact known for years to those men imprisoned at the Central Prison having to suffer these abuses and onlyuntil recently a fact denied for decades by successive prior Bulgarian Ministers for Justice. Now allegations of official malfeasances such as corruption, abuse of power and brutality by prison officials are repeated on national and international television and the press. no longer the excusive province of only those imprisoned men suffering these violations of Bulgarianlaw and international treaties.imprisoned at the hands of men and women who believe they are above law. at the SofiaCentral Prison, but . Allegations of and the national law by Sofia prison officials now provesto be the rule and not the exception. A
Furthermore,The first and foremost among the reasons for the Applicant’s appearing before thisCourt is to have the Court it end a 17 year or more policy of unlawful discrimination
imposed and maintained by past Ministers for Justice of Republic of Bulgaria and used byofficials of the Sofia Central Prison to demean, demoralize, dehumanize, intimidate and even
19313976.doc
 
MKapoustinPage 3 of 25March 14, 2006coerce money from foreign citizens. Officials at the Sofia prison have been conditioned andtrained by the Respondent to refuse to anyone who is not a Bulgarian national or citizen hisright to equal opportunity rights and protections under the
 Law for the Execution of  Punishment 
. These same Sofia prison officials are responsible for forcing non-Bulgariancitizens to sign and accept legal documents in the Bulgarian language, a language they cannot possibly understand when first entering prison. Punishments are imposed and the confiscatingof a foreign citizen’s property occurs without Sofia prison official or officials of therespondent once attempting to explain in a language other than Bulgaria what the legal and property consequences of these administrative acts [punishments]. Instead Sofia prisonofficials abandon their responsibility and rely on Sofia prison inmates to explain to non-Bulgarian prison inmates their legal rights and obligations.
The second reason for the Applicant’s appearing before this Court is the desire to havethis Court imbue some transparency, accountability and judicial control into theactivities of a collective administrative body of the Sofia prison and upon prison officialsemployed by the Respondent
.
 
The Applicant’s objective
 
is to
 
 bring to an end the unlawfuldiscriminations and other questionable administrative policies and practices of a Sofia prisoncollective administrative body organized under article 17 of the Law on the Execution of Punishments, hereinafter the “COMMISSION”. Individual voting member of this“Commission” have demonstrated a complete disregard for the constitutional and other legallimitations imposed by their non-judicial role. Sofia prison “Commission” members openlyrefuse to observe exactly and without alteration the national laws of Bulgaria. Historical Sofia prison officials have demonstrated a high degree of impunity towards any Bulgarian nationallaw that might limits their power over a person deprived of liberty or the judicial proceduresthat seek to make prison officials accountable for administrative actions or inactions injuringthe civil, legal or human rights of a prisoner.
The third and final reason for appearing before this Court is a result of Respondentofficials
inter alia
(1) refusing to admit that certain provisions of its administrativeorders directly contravene tangible legal provisions of the Constitution and Bulgaria’sinternational treaties and Law for the Execution of Punishments when applyingnational laws differently to non-Bulgarian prison inmates, and; (2) insisting that theadministrative acts of the Sofia prison and actions of its officials are not subject to eitherto the rules of public transparency or administrative judicial accountability orsupervision.
The Respondent refuses to identify to prisoners or their families the name,official position and responsibility of a public official employed at the Sofia prison andinsodoing is intentionally obstructing justice solely to protect prison employees from possiblecivil prosecutions and personal liability for unlawful administrative acts. In several officialletters to the Applicant and the Embassy of Canada, officials of the Respondent have insistedthat the identities of administrative employees at the Sofia prison are protected byinternational treaties and Bulgaria “secrecy” laws. However, despite numerous demands theRespondent has been unable in subsequent letters to identify the laws or treaties cited by it.
It is as a result of the above that the Applicant has been left with no other recourseexcept to turn to the Supreme Administrative Court for the Republic of Bulgaria.
What will the Applicant Prove?
19313976.doc
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...