PETICIJA zaradi krivične sodbe 26828/06 Evropskega sodišča za člo

PETICIJA zaradi krivične sodbe 26828/06 Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice

 

Podpisniki peticij želimo opozoriti spoštovano Evropsko sodišče za človekove pravice na zmoto, ki jo je naredilo z izdajo sodbe 26828/06, saj je bilo sodišče pristransko obveščeno o dejanski resnici o izbrisanih. Iz same odločbe Ustavnega sodišča je razvidno, da bi naj le to odločalo o 18.305 izbrisanih. Z ponovnim štetjem pa je notranja ministrica zlorabila pooblastila Ustavnega sodišča in število izbrisanih povečala na več kot 25.671.

Dejansko je s takim preštevanjem notranja ministrica posegla v pristojnosti Ustavnega sodišča saj je s povečanim številom tako imenovanih izbrisanih spremenila Odločbo Ustavnega sodišča, ki je ugotovilo 18.305 izbrisanih. Tako spreminjanje pa je v nasprotju z Ustavo RS in delitvijo oblasti med zakonodajno, izvršno in sodno oblastjo.

Na žalost je to sodišče pri odločitvi spregledalo in vladi Republike Slovenije naložilo da sprejme zakon s katerim bo povrnilo odškodnine 25.671 izbrisanim, to pa je v nasprotju z dejansko resnico o številu izbrisanih. Med temi je namreč velika večina agresorskih JA vojakov, ki so se pred izbrisom izselili iz Slovenije in že na podlagi ločenega mnenja ustavnega sodnika dr. Cirila Ribičiča niso upravičeni do priznanja pravic.

Tudi trditev, da so nekateri ostali brez državljanstva ne drži, saj je imel vsak poleg Jugoslovanskega državljanstva še državljanstvo republike kjer se je rodil. Da nimajo državljanstva pa so se sklicevali ljudje, ki si niso uredili dokumentov novo nastale  države kjer so bili rojeni. Za tako malomarnost posameznikov pa v nobenem primeru ni odgovorna Slovenija ampak posamezniki, ki so zahtevali, da jim vse uredi slovenska država, sami pa niso bili pripravljeni nič narediti čeprav bi si po razpadu države morali urediti nove dokumente tako kot smo si jih morali vsi Slovenci ! Tudi trditev o otrocih brez državljanstva ne drži, saj so vsi nacionalisti otroke rojene v Sloveniji vpisali v državljanske knjige v republikah od koder so prišli v Slovenijo. Logično pa je, da tudi otroci niso imeli osebnih dokumentov iz katerih bi se lahko videlo kje so vpisani v državljansko knjigo saj tega hote niso naredili njihovi starši zato, da sedaj lahko neupravičeno tožijo Slovenijo za odškodnino. Vi spoštovano sodišče pa s temi dejstvi niste bili seznanjeni.

Ker gre za ogromne zneske, ki jih zahtevajo izbrisani kot odškodnino gre vse to v škodo slovenskih državljanov, ki bi morali plačevati odškodnine tudi agresorskim JA vojakom, ki so v času izbrisa pobijali po Bosni. Zato v nobenem primeru niso upravičeni do odškodnine,saj so se skupaj z JA IZSELILI iz države Slovenije in jim je po 20. členu Zakona o tujcih iz leta 1991 prenehalo stalno prebivališče. To, da do priznanja pravic niso upravičeni  je v ločenem mnenju leta 2003 ugotovil tudi ustavni sodnik dr. Ciril Ribičič. Še posebej sporno je to, da so med njimi tudi zločinci, ki so sodelovali pri genocidu v Srebrenici in bi dejansko pomenilo tako priznavanje pravic dajanje alibijev zločincem, to pa je v nasprotju z vsemi mednarodnimi pogodbami.

Zato apeliramo na spoštovano Evropsko sodišče za človekove pravice, da vladi Republike Slovenije dovoli, da v zakon zapiše, da morajo vsi, ki bodo zahtevali pravice in odškodnino upravičenost dokazati pred pristojnimi sodišči.

Tako določilo je nujno dodati saj bodo z njim preprečili ekonomsko uničenje Slovenije zaradi odškodnin špekulantov, ki do odškodnin  niso upravičeni  že zaradi samega ločenega mnenja ustavnega sodnika dr. Cirila Ribičič!   To ločeno mnenje pa ste vi spoštovano Evropsko sodišče spregledali, saj vas na to ni nihče opozoril. Dejansko so vsi, ki so se udeležili razprave imeli nalogo blatenja osamosvojitve ne pa zagovarjanja ukrepov za zaščito države.

 

Lep pozdrav Franc Majcen

Priloge : 20. člen Zakona o tujcih, ločeno mnenje dr. Ciril Ribičič

Dodan seznam podpisnikov, ki sledi:

PRITRDILNO LOČENO MNENJE SODNIKA DR. CIRILA RIBIČIČA
V ZADEVI U-I-246/02
6. Ustavno sodišče je v času, ko še nisem bil njegov član, poskušalo zaokreniti odnos države do vseh, ki so nezakonito izgubili stalno prebivališče, vendar na žalost le s polovičnim uspehom. Zato je ponovno odločanje Ustavnega sodišča posebnega pomena, saj mora težiti ne le k pravični rešitvi, ampak tudi k temu, da njegove odločitve ne bo mogoče ponovno razlagati različno in kakorkoli zaobiti v praksi.

Pomisleke, da bi lahko prišlo do preširokega vračanja stalnega prebivališča, štejem v glavnem za brezpredmetne. Zakaj? Zato, ker gre pri izbrisanih za tiste, ki so 1992. leta protizakonito izgubili stalno prebivališče in ne za tiste oficirje nekdanje JLA, ki so z JLA zapustili območje Republike Slovenije (precej preden se je zgodil izbris stalnega prebivališča).

 

20. člen Z A K O N O TUJCIH

Dovoljenje za stalno ali začasno prebivanje tujca preneha: 
- če preteče veljavnost dovoljenja za začasno prebivanje in tujec ne zaprosi za podaljšanje dovoljenja; 
- če se tujec, ki ima dovoljenje za stalno prebivanje, izseli 
ali ostane v tujini neprekinjeno več kot eno leto in o tem ni obvestil pristojnega organa; 
- če pridobi državljanstvo Republike Slovenije.

Št. 213-04/91-1/2
Ljubljana, dne 5. junija 1991
Skupščina 
Republike Slovenije
Predsednik
dr. France Bučar

 

PETITION regarding unjust judgment 26828/06 of the European Court of Human Rights

 

Signers of Petition wish to point out to the mistake that  the respected European Court of Human Rights made by issuing the judgment 26828/06 because the Court was incorrectly informed about the factual truth about the problem of The Erased in Slovenia. From the Decision of Slovenian Constitutional Court it is evident that the decision is regarding to 18.305 persons. With renewed counting the former Interior Minister abused the authorisation by Constitutional Court and increased the number to 25.671.

 

With such action the former Interior Minister interfered into competence of Constitutional Court because it changed the Ruling of the Constitutional Court which reffers to census of 18.305. Such interference is opposing the Constitution of The Republic of Slovenia and the principle of division of power between juridistical, executive and legislative branch.

 

Unfortunately, this was overlooked by the European Court of Human Rights and ordered the Government of Republic of Slovenia to pass the Law to pay compensation to 25.671 people, which is the wrong number of The Erased. Among them there are a lot of aggressor soldiers that moved out of Slovenia before the act of erasure and are not eligible to be granted the rights, as stated by Separate opinion to the Judgement of Constitutional Judge Dr. Ciril Ribičič.

 

Also the statement that some were stripped of Citizenship is not true, because everybody had a citizeship of the native republic in addition to Yugoslav Citizenship. The claime that they didn't have a citizenship was claimed by those, who didn't arrange a citizenship in newly created state in the place of their birth. Such a negligence of some individuals is not the guilt of the Republic of Slovenia but of the the individuals that demanded that everything should be arranged by Slovenian state. They were asked to arrange new documents just as every resident of Slovenia had to. Additionally,  the claims about the children without citizenship are not true, because all nationalists parents enlisted their children (born in Slovenia) to their native republics from where they came to Slovenia. It is logical that the children didn't have personal documents with information where they are enlisted into citizenship just as their parents haven't done; so they are now unjustified sueing Slovenia. The respected Court, You was not informed about this facts.

 

Ragarding the huge amount of money that is demanded by The Erased as compensations, it is all at the expense of Slovene Citizens, that could pay compensation to the aggressor Yugoslav Army soldiers, that were actively operating in the Bosnian war at the time of the erasure. Therefore they are in neither case eligible for compensation, because they MOVED OUT of Slovenia together with Yugoslav Army and by the Article 20 of Foreigners Law (year 1991) they lost (ceasation) permanent residence in Slovenia. That they are not eligible to granting rights was explicitely stated by Constitutional Judge Dr. Ciril Ribičič in Separate Opinion to the Rule of Constitutional Court in the case of The Erased, 2003. It is extraordirily controversial that among them there are war criminals which were involved in the genocide of Srebrenica. So, this actually means that they would be given alibi for the war crimes - what is contrary to all international conventions.

 

Therefore we appeal to the respected European Court of Human Rights to allow Slovenian Government to write the statement in the Law requiring everybody demanding the rights and compensations to prove the eligibility on the Court in individual case.

 

Such a provision is necessary to prevent economic collapse of Slovenia in the wake of compensations for speculators that are not eligible for compensations due to Separate Opinion of Constitutional Judge Dr. Ciril Ribičič! This Separate Opinion was unfortenatally overlooked by You, the respected European Court of Human Rights, as You were not aware of it.

 

All the participants from Slovenian side were politicaly motivated to put all the blame on Slovenia and not to advocate the measures to protect the Slovenia.

 

 

Best regards,  Franc Majcen

 

Annex:

 

Article 20 of Foreigners Law (year 1991)

Separate Opinion of Constitutional Judge Dr. Ciril Ribičič (2003)

List of Signatures to the Petition

 

 

 

------------------------------------

 

Separate Opinion of Constitutional Judge Dr. Ciril Ribičič

in the case U-I-246/02

 

6. Constitutional Court in the time, when I was not it's member, tried to redirect the relation of the State towards all, who unlawfully lost permanent residence, but unfortunatelly only with half success. Therefore the renewed ruling of Constitutional Court is of special meaning, because it must tend not only towards just solution, but also with goal, that it's ruling will not again be understood differentlly and to bypass it anyway in practice.

 

Concerns, that it can lead to massive returning of permanent residence, I assume as baseless. Why ? Because in the case of The Erased those lost permanent residence in 1992 against the law, and not for those officers of Yugoslav Army, who, together with Yugoslav Army left the area of Republic of Slovenia (a lot before the erasure from permanent residence happened).

 

---------------------------

 

Article 20 of Foreigners Law (year 1991)

 

The permition for permanent or temporary residence of foreigner ceases:

- if the validity of permition for temporary residence ceases and foreigner does not imply for the prolongation of permition;

- if the foreigner, who has permition for permanent residence, moves

out or stays abroad continuously for more than one year and does not inform the competent organ;

- if he obtains the Slovene Citizenship.

 

No. 213-04/91-1/2

Ljubljana, 5th June 1991
Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia
President dr. France Bučar

 


OR

Your email address will not be published on our site. However, the author of the petition will see all the information you provide on this form.

You will receive an email with a link to confirm your signature. Please check your inbox (and spam folder).
Facebook