Germar Rudolf, Resistance Is Obligatory (2012; PDF-Datei

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
things, that the accusation of deceit has to be made by the judge during
the hearing and that evidence in this regard has to be introduced or
named, so that the immigrant can defend himself against it. By means
of the verbal transcript we subsequently managed to prove that during
the entire hearing the judge had never raised the accusation of deceit.
Quite to the opposite he had repeatedly confirmed the seriousness, respectability
and the well-founded nature of my asylum application. Furthermore
all the documents listed in the verdict as apparent proof for
my alleged deceit either had not been introduced into the trial or I had
not been told that the introduced documents would be seen as proof for
this claim.
Since the verbal transcript is part of the trial documentation reviewed
by the court of appeals, it was easy for us to prove that the asylum
verdict was a misjudgment in this regard, and we consequently won
the appeal regarding this issue.
Not to have any verbal transcript at all is in my eyes unworthy of a
state under the rule of law. This is almost an invitation to error and perversion
of justice. In Germany a defendant is totally at the mercy of the
impartiality or infallibility of the judge. But not all judges are impartial,
and not a single one of them is infallible.
This isn’t just my opinion, but it is a serious flaw of the German judicial
system which has been repeatedly and massively criticized,
among it recently by the well-known defense lawyer Rolf Bossi in his
2005 book Demigods in Black. 124 In it he also criticizes that the Federal
German principle of free assessment of evidence, which means that only
the investigating judge directly confronted with the case may assess
the evidence, has deteriorated to an anarchical liberty to arbitrary probative
claims. This is especially true for cases deliberated in front of a
District Court, whose decisions cannot be appealed, which means that
there is no second trial dealing with the facts of the matter. After a verdict
of a District Court one can merely request a revision by the German
Federal Supreme Court, but they examine only matters of law, yet never
matters of fact as claimed by the subordinate court. Hence, in cases
where it is about neck or nothing for the defendant, that is, where it is
about alleged serious crimes dealt with directly by District Courts, a
defense against errors or arbitrary claims by judges about matters of fact
is impossible.
124 Rolf Bossi, Halbgötter in Schwarz, Eichborn, Frankfurt/M, 2005.
103