European Union..Europaeische Union
Austria(now EU-(Austria):1999
Elections to the National Council
Wahlen/Elections:
-unfair elections
official time table
regulations
Links:
Parlament=Parliament: | |||
| Austria/�sterreich,EU-Austria/EU-�sterreich | |||
| Nationalrat=National Council | |||
| 1990: | Zeit/time | Wahlbehoerden=election authorities | Kandidatur=candidature |
| 1994: | Zeit/time | Wahlbehoerden=election authorities | Kandidatur=candidature |
| 1995: | Zeit/time | Wahlbehoerden=election authorities | Kandidatur=candidature |
| 1996: | Zeit/time | Wahlbehoerden=election authorities | Kandidatur=candidature |
| 1999: | Zeit/time | Wahlbehoerden=election authorities | Kandidatur=candidature |
| Bundesrat=Federal Council | |||
| Austria/�sterreich,EU-Austria/EU-�sterreich,
EU-(Austria)/EU-(�sterreich) | |||
| ...reserved for the regime parties | |||
19991011.html in the year -1999/-iJ 42 in the year 2000/iJ 42/43z 1 P 97/96k-174
EU-slavery and robbery act in the elections 1999 to the EU-(Austria)dictatorship National Council=The parliament. The Parliament has 1 seat in the government and legislation of the EU which is called the "Council of Europe" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 P 97/96k /174 FEDERAL EMBLEM REPUBLIC AUSTRIA LANDCOURT KORNEUBURG Land- and Districtcourt Korneuburg Received on 1 - MRZ. 2000 ...Hours ...Min ....times, with ......Enclosure ......Acts .................semistatement 25 R 60/99x 25 R 65/99g 25 R 77/99x 25 R 78/99v The Landcourt Korneuburg as appealing court has has adopted the d e c i s i on by its Vicepresident Dr. TSCHUGGUEL as head, as well as the judges Dr. BREYCHA and Dr. KLADENSKY in the slavery act of Mag. Franz GLASL, geb.10.5.1957, Lachsfeld16/Al,2113 Karnabrunn, because of the appealing of the affected against the decisions of the districtcourt Korneuburg of 10.9.1999, 1 P 97/96k-133 9, of 12. 7. 199 9, 1 P 97/96k- 133, of 24 . 9 . 1999 , 1 P 97/96k-143, and of 19.11.1999, 1 P 97/96k (just without filenumber), in its non-public meeting: The appealing against the decisions of 10.9.1999, 12.7.1999 and 19.11.1999 is n o t agreed. The ordinary Revionsappealing is inadmissable. The appealing against the decision of 24.9.1999 is n o t agreed. The Revisionsappealing is however that may be inadmissable. - 2 - statement of reasons I.) With the appealed decision of 10.9.1999 the first court designated Dr. Richard Schwach, Lawyer in Korneuburg, as slavedriver for the affected for the consorting with officies, officials and courts and stated that the affected has to cover the costs of the proceedings according to � 252 sec.2 Au�StrGG whereby the numerical setting is reserved for a seperate decisionmaking. Against that is the appealing of the affected directed because of fileunlawfullness, voidness, incompetence of the officials and unlawful and wrong legal judgement with the claim, to quash and declare all proceedingsactions, decisions and orders for void. The appealing is not justified. For the record is to adhere first of all that the affected challenges all courtpersons, designated representatives for him and all other participants, as in particular the expert Univ. Prof. Dr. Gerhard Kaiser , and feels himself massively hunted. He carries on to fight against any courtsdecision whereby his remedies are produced with textprocessing and contain a constant part which contain the reproduction of always the same phrases and formulations and is organized in codenumbers which donot allow to go after. The appealed decision concerned can be found on the second page of the remedy as a rule unter the designation of "-KKK021". Always findings-, assessment of evidence- and proceedings defectiveness, wrong legal judgement, voidness, lack of domestic justice, violation of human rights and similar more, infringement of the formal and substantive law, defectiveness of the proceedings, qualified violations of the proceedings, unlawful and wrong legal judgement(legal statments), fileunlawfulness, defectiveness of the procedure, voidness, in granting claims and reparations to me, imcomptence, bias of the participants which I a challenge for bias -as stated in Paragr 7 AVG, in other regulations stated reasons as well as because of being in conflict with their interests-for party and state, impartiality, bias, prepossession, subjectivity, partiality, incompetence, is claimed - 3 - and in the single case there a no particular pleadings to the single appealing reasons. The submitted writting received on 1.10.1999 of the affected(0N 147) has to be considered as remedy against the decision of 10.9.1999. This results of the fact that the affected stated in an earlier writing (0N 144) that the remedy against the "slaverydecision" of 10.9.1999 is lodged separatedly. With regard to the contents can be quoted, that the affected is of the opinion that he doesnot need any enslavement and is not psychically ill or mentally handicapped. The firstcourt has on the whole ascertained that there is a remarkable paranoid picture of the affected who takes everything personally and feels himself hunted, even when this is not the case objectively. This state hinders the affected to have it out keeping with the environment, therefore all events become for him a case for authorities and courts and he is fully engaged to take measures against it. Therefore the affected needs the help of a slavedriver for files, suits and other steps with the courts as well as for acting before (dealing with) officies and authorities. Being connected with the contents the first court has qualified the state of the affected as psychical illness. The findings of the first court rely on the evidence of the expert Univ. Prof.Dr. Gerhard Kaiser, against which the affected has nothing sound to oppose. The correctness of the evidence is obvious because of the way and numerous of the files submitted by the affected in frame of the slaveryproceedings. A special crass excample is mentioned, the affected feels himself offended by the judge as he stated that he doesnot want to harm evil to the affected(0N 142). Therefore having this in view the requirements - 4 - for the designation of a slavedriver according to � 273 ABGB exist. The affected is because of his psychical illness not in the position to manage specified matters namely acting befor (dealing with) officies,officials and courts with the danger of a disadvantage for himself. Many of his files are suitable to cause costs and fees in an amount not to be foreseen. What the person of the slavedriver concerns according to the files it is obvious that there is absolutely no confidence between the affected and the designated lawyer. As the affected because of his illness feels himself being hunted or harmed by the person with whom he has contact, the first court couldnot find a person of his confidence naturally. The appealing against the decion of 10.9.1999 had not to be agreed. II.) With the appealed decision of 12. 7. 1999 the first court called for proceedings on 10.9.1999 and order the kidnapping of the affected for this appointed day. Against that the appealing of the affected is directed because of the mentioned reasons above with the application to quash all appealed acts, hunting actions and third party claims. The appealing is not justified. According to the filenote of the first court of 20.5.1999 (0N 126) the appointed expert Univ. Prof. Dr. Kaiser informs the court that the affected has not come to an examination despite of citation several times and an expertise is not possible on the grounds of the files. Susequently the first court set a - 5 - proceedings for the 6.7.1999, whereby also the expert should have had been present and was so. The citation wa delivered to the affected on 21.6.1999 personally. As the affected didnot appear, the proceedings had to be prolonged for his kidnapping and production. The OGH has adopted in his decision of 20.4.1993, 1 Ob 523/93 (RZ 1994155) , that the compulsory demonstration of the affected to the expert is permissible. Also like the demonstration to the first hearing according to � 237 Abs. 2 Au�StrG requires demonstration that the affected has not followed the citation to the expert. This requirement is given, and the affected even didnot follow a further citation to the court. Therefore the appealed order of the production of the affected is not to be questioned. The appealing against the decision of 12.7.1999 had not to be accepted. III.) With the appealed decision of 24. 9.1999 the first court fixed that the fees for the expert of bestimmte das Erstgericht die Geb�hren des Sachverstandi- Univ.Prof.Dr. Gerhard Kaiser with S 4.004,-- and decided that the affected is liable to pay. Against that the appealing of the affected is directed because of the reasons stated above with the application to quash and declare all proceedingsactions, decisions and orders for void. The appealing is not justified. Of arguments of the contents of the appealing can be taken that the feenote of the expert was not delivered to the affected by the firstcourt and that the expert has executed his activities with defectiveness respectively " exploited fully for acts of violence". - 6 - That the feenote was not delivered to the affected personally is not a violation of due process of law and therefore is also no voidness, because the feenote was delivered to the preliminary slavedriver. The affected has the open possibility to lodge applications by himself in the slavery proceedings and to submitt remidies , but this doesnot mean that all writings which are delivered to his representative have also to be delivered to the affected. The preliminary slavedriver was also designated legally binding(0N 41), therefore it is supposed that the delivery of the feenote is ordinary. That the expert has carried out his duties with defectiveness cannot be taken out of the filecontents, not even that he has used his duties for acts of violence against the affected. Arguments to the separate details of the feenote are not presented. Also the appealing against the decision of 24. 9.1999 had not to be accepted. IV.) With the appealed decision of 19.11. 1999 the first court appointed for the representation of the affected in the proceedings 3 C 1054/98s of the district court Korneuburg Ing. Dr. Karl 0ssana as collissionguardian(=2.slavedriver). Against that the appealing of the affected is directed because of the reasons stated above with the applications stated likewise. The appealing against the decision of 19.11.1999 is not justified. - 7 - The proceedings stated by the first court concern actions of the affected against the preliminary slavedriver Dr. Richard Schwach. Therefore there is no conflict of interest on the side of the defendant which at the same time is designated representative of the plaintiff. It is obvious that the designation of a collissionguardian(=2.slavedriver)designation set by the first court was necessary. The appealingpleadings goes in the direccion that the affected claims an infringement by designating of any enslavement and representation at all, nevertheless to this there has to be referred to the statements to point I.). Therefore the appealing against the decision of 19.11.1999 had not to be agreed. The inadmissibility of the Revisionsappealing to point III.) results from � 14 Abs.2 z 1 Au�StrG. By the way the sentence about the inadmissibility of the appealing is based on � 13 Abs.l Au�StrG. A question of law of the required qualification in � 14 Abs.l Au�StrG is not applicable. Landcourt Korneuburg Hauptplatz 18, 2100 Korneuburg Abt. 25, am 27. J�nner 2000 Sect.25, am 27. 1. 2000 Dr.Wilhelm Tschugguel For the correctness of the copy the head of the section: signature unknown ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- received on 3.3.2000
last: Wahlbeh�rden/election authority