Legal matter Hickman versus the city of Wilhelmshaven
04.12.2003

 

Michael Hickman
Wilhelmshaven

Amtsgericht Wilhelmshaven
Marktstraße 15 – 17
26382 Wilhelmshaven

Beschwerdezyklen beim Justizministerium von Niedersachsen AKTENZEICHEN 4121 E -S4. 54/03 und AKTENZEICHEN 3700 E - 204.37/03
Dr. Busch, Frau Bakker, Herr Wessels, Frau Ballnus
Am Waterloo Platz 1
30169 Hannover
poststelle@mj.niedersachsen.de
Fax 0511 120 5170

Niedersächsischer Landtag
Pet 5816/11/14
Pet 00447/08/15
Hinrich-Wilhelm-Kopf-Platz 1
30159 Hannover
Postfach 4407
30044 Hannover
vockert@vockert.de,
klaus.krumfuss@t-online.de,
info@frauke-heiligenstadt.de
Frau Kuck, Frau Busch
Frau Lütjering
Fax 0511 3030 2806

The Hague Conference on Private International Law
Mr. Hans van Loon, Secretary General
Prof. William Duncan
Deputy Secretary General
Permanent Bureau of
The Hague Conference
on Private International Law
Scheveningseweg 6
2517 KT Den-Haag
The Netherlands
Wd@hcch.nl
Hvl@hcch.nl
secretariat@hcch.net

Mr Sibusiso Bengu
The South African Ambassador to Germany
South African Embassy
Friedrichstrasse 60
10117 Berlin
botschaft@suedafrika.org

The South African President
Mr. T.M. Mbeki
Office of the President
Private Bag X1000
Pretoria 0001
Südafrika
President@po.gov.za

Claudia Roth, MdB
Beauftragte der Bundesregierung für Menschenrechtspolitik
Federal Government Commissioner for Human Rights Policy and Humanitarian Aid
Auswärtiges Amt
Werderscher Markt 1
11013 Berlin
claudia.roth@bundestag.de
claudia.roth@wk.bundestag.de
Marita Sehn
Anke Schwarzbäck
Petition Committee at the German Bundestag
Petitionsausschuss des deutschen Bundestages
Pet 4-14-07-301-050630
Platz der Republik 1
11011 Berlin
Fax: 030 227 30015
marita.sehn@bundestag.de
klaus.hagemann@bundestag.de

Wolfgang Thierse
President of the German federal parliament
Präsident des Deutschen Bundestages
Personal Referent
Persönlicher Referent
Wolfram Kolodziej-Derfert
Platz der Republik 1
11011 Berlin
wolfgang.thierse@bundestag.de
praesident@bundestag.de

Deutscher Richterbund
Vorsitzender Wolfgang Arenhövel
Kronenstr. 73/74
10117 Berlin
Wolfgang.Arenhoevel@lg-os.niedersachsen.de
frank.sta.freiburg@t-online.de
jan.grotheer@fg.justiz.hamburg.de
elmar.herrler@olg-n.bayern.de
brigitte.kamphausen@lg-duisburg.nrw.de
BettinaLeetz@web.de
August-Wilhelm.Marahrens@lg-h.niedersachsen.de
dwtapper@rz-online.de
HanspeterT@t-online.de
info@drb.de

Institut für Menschenrechte
Institute for human rights, Berlin
info@institut-fuer-menschenrechte.de

Commission on Human Rights
Support Services Branch
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland  
1503@ohchr.org

Herr Ralf Janßen
Ausländeramt
Stadt Wilhelmshaven
Rathaus platz 1
26382 Wilhelmshaven
Fax 04421 16411267
ralf.janssen@stadt.wilhelmshaven.de

Klaus Stoltenberg
Menschenrechtsbeauftragter der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland
human rights commissioner of the
Federal Republic of Germany
Bundesministerium der Justiz
Mohrenstraße 37
10117 Berlin
 poststelle@bmj.bund.de




04. DECEMBER 2003

a) FILE NUMBER 6 C 1411/03 district court of Wilhelmshaven
Racism and national socialist motives in German state-run child abduction and alienation programs

b) Complaint to the supervision authority against the German judge Huelsebusch and the legal demand to refrain from insult, threat and coercion against the applicant because the applicant speaks out against the resurrection of the national socialist school of thought

c) criminal charges against the Nazi Heinrich Himmler due to child abduction and Crimes against Humanity

d) Petition to the German federal parliament for verification of the German federal ministry of justice and immediate dismissal from office of Klaus Stoltenberg, human rights commissioner of the Federal Republic of Germany at the German federal ministry of justice


Dear Mr. Wolfgang Thierse, president of the German parliament,
Dear Mrs. Marita Sehn chairwoman of the petition committee at the German federal parliament,
With the authorisation of the petitioner of the present petition proceedings at the German Federal Parliament Pet 4-14-07-301-050630 the herein documented events at the district court of Wilhelmshaven and at the higher regional court of Oldenburg are indicated as further proof for the establishing of an independent enquête committee on the judiciary crimes against humanity by the practice of German family law jurisdiction.
1) Why proceedings in child matters are refused, delayed, and manipulated, e.g., at the district court of Wilhelmshaven and at the higher regional court of Oldenburg on child abduction and boycott of access, while expeditious proceedings are presented to the German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in the legal matter of "alleged coloured hair" against the free press before the culminating point of the election campaign 2002 ?
2) Why are there written laws in Germany, which are valid respectively invalid for a certain population group due to sex, status, and nationality out of political motivation?
3) Why in German family court proceedings in respect to international child abduction to Germany and the boycott of access that follows, is intolerance of foreigners, racism and discriminatory working methods to be observed, which admit the conclusion of national socialistic thoughts and there resurrection? 
Hereby the official request to integrate the accompanying online documentation into the internet presence of the German Federal Parliament.
Online documentation:
http://www.michael-hickman.org

Case file number
6 C 1411/03 (I) district court
Wilhelmshaven in the legal matter Hickman versus the city of Wilhelmshaven

On the 26.11.2003 in the case presented the district court of Wilhelmshaven documents, that the German judge Huelsebusch makes the  statement with the following procedural patterns:
The German judge Huelsebusch insults and slanders the applicant and children’s father with the statement, that the applicant and children’s father "has evidently lost all reasonable standards for the guidance of human acting" While the German judge Huelsebusch deliberately covers the incorrect working methods of the district court of Wilhelmshaven with deliberate delay of proceedings for a year and the deliberate non-enforcement of court ordered access for two years.
The German judge Huelsebusch places the applicant and children’s father under the criminal offence, that the applicant and children’s father " that he grossly insults all experts that he encounters in his affair" whiteout naming a single one of these experts and a single insult and without adding substance to his construed accusations.

The German judge Huelsebusch complains, that the applicant and children’s father "insistingly wants to be right ", while the German judge Huelsebusch deliberately covers the documented incorrect working methods of the German jurist, social and administrative authorities in international child abduction and boycott of access. The German judge Huelsebusch deliberately does not explain, why at all correcting proceedings are necessary in regards to incorrect proceedings on international child abduction and boycott of access, while the German judge Huelsebusch against the facts of social reality wants insistently to be right with the statement that German authorities would work correctly. If the district court of Wilhelmshaven, the judge Hülsebusch and his German judge colleagues would have worked correctly in accordance with the argumentation logic of the judge Hülsebusch it is on the other hand only to be explained with extreme difficulties how it comes to eight years of proceedings on international child abduction to Germany and resulting boycott of access as well as to the proceedings for assuming responsibility.
The German judge Huelsebusch complains that the applicant and children’s father "addresses political leadership, to make grave allegations against judges of committing severe criminal offences and to make respective demands for criminal prosecution ". In a democratic society, the judge and his official service in the name of the people and paid by the people needs to be submitted to correct verification and criticism by the public. Under the perquisites that judge Huelsebusch may have the personal political opinion that Germany should most probably not a democratic constitutional state, the quality assurance as well as the understanding of responsibility of judges' acting quite naturally are gaining completely different dimensions. Thus in this case, the political and judicial way through the German instances aiming at altering the German constitution or even abolishing the German constitution has be opened on recommendation of the German judge Hülsebusch.
While the German judge Huelsebusch complains that the applicant and children’s father makes "absurd connections of historical events", the German judge Huelsebusch supports as documented on one side German officials, that call children abducted to Germany "German children", who turns to the political leadership to make grave allegations against judges and to make demands for criminal prosecution " while the applicant acts against the unconstitutional acts with a national socialist background of German judges, the German judge Huelsebusch has to date brought no evidence, that shows that the German judge Huelsebusch acts against the Nazis, against nazi jurists and against the resurrection of the nazi school of thought within the judiciary of the Federal Republic of Germany.
The German judge Huelsebusch insults and slanders the applicant and children’s father with the statement, that the applicant and children’s father "twists the facts ", without grounding or substantiating his accusation. The German judge Huelsebusch as documented, unfounded and in an inadmissible manner calls the applicant a liar.
The German judge Huelsebusch insults and slanders the applicant and children’s father with the statement, that the applicant and children’s father makes "absurd connections to historical events". The German judge Huelsebusch simultaneously refuses to name the jurists that served the nazi regime, to name the crimes of the jurists that served the nazi regime, as well as to mention the refusal to de-nazify the judiciary by German officials in the magisterial district of Oldenburg. While the German judge Huelsebusch appears to be in doubt of the Nuremberg tribunal as well as the judgements in regards to crimes against humanity inclusive of child abduction and alienation, the German judge Huelsebusch simultaneously refuses to render an account for the incorrect working methods of the responsible German officials in regards to international child abduction and boycott of access.
The alienation cycle of the nazi child abduction program is purposely instituted to Germanise the abducted children.
While the German judge Huelsebusch insults and slanders the applicant and children’s father with the statement, that the applicant and children’s father makes " absurd connections to historical events " the German judge Huelsebusch supports as documented on one side German officials, that call children abducted to Germany "German children" and deliberately refuses on the other side as documented to process the legal demand of the 20.11.2003 to respect the legal protection of the binational foreign born children which were abducted to Germany to their foreign identity.
The German judge Huelsebusch insults and slanders the applicant and children’s father with the statement, that the applicant and children’s father with the statement, the applicant and children’s father commits "unsinnige Gesetzesauslegungen". Simultaneously the German judge Huelsebusch refuses to name the legal basis for deliberate delay of proceedings and the deliberate non-enforcement of court ordered access as is deliberately practised by the district court of Wilhelmshaven.
The German judge Huelsebusch says, that "no German authority is obliged to" to examine national socialistic body of thought of German authorities and German official employees. This theory brought forward by the German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven is to be denoted as extremely "daring" and requires further examination via the available legal measures.
The German judge Huelsebusch deliberately refuses the right to a fair trail and the right to be heard with the statement "On these grounds I will not forward your latest submission to anyone and in future I will not take notice of submissions with comparative format and contents but will only classify them for non-processing". The German judge Huelsebusch refuses the negotiation of subject matters in which he obviously comes into a conflict of interests with his own personal political conviction against the constitutional principle of independence.
The German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven has the opportunity to officially excuse the behaviour of the German judge Huelsebusch within the usual judicial delay of two weeks.
The morally and politically responsible director of the district court of Wilhelmshaven has the opportunity to officially excuse the behaviour of the German judge Huelsebusch within the usual judicial delay of two weeks.
Dear Mr. German judge Huelsebusch from the district court of Wilhelmshaven,
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the district court of Wilhelmshaven,
Your praiseworthy approach as a German judge to want to stand your historical responsibility, is greeted as a praiseworthy start.
It is to be pointed out to you for your understanding of democracy and the constitutionality.
You are legally obliged to in accordance with the guidelines of the Federal Ministry of Justice, the justice Ministry of Lower Saxony, as well as the German criminal code to accept criminal charges.
Certainly you are free in your "independence" to correctly process the forwarding of the criminal charges, you can either forward them or you can deliberately not forward them.
To clarify the factual content following your official statement it is now to be made know if, you have considered to refuse to correctly process the criminal charges in the legal matter Hickman versus the city of Wilhelmshaven, an official statement from you is required for the continued legal course, as to if you have considered to deliberately obstruct the orderly legal course so as to collaborate with the accused.
The following is brought to your attention in regards to the factual content and the incorrect behavioural pattern and working methods German judges and German courts:
Your praiseworthy start to admit, that German judges and German courts deliberately cause the applicant costs in proceedings in regards to custody and access, while German judges and German courts as documented at the district court of Wilhelmshaven in proceedings in regards to international child abduction to Germany and boycott of access has been deliberately delayed over a time period of one year and court ordered access has deliberately not been enforced over a period of two years, is greeted as a praiseworthy start.
Certainly it is your choice in your "independence" to join these incorrect working methods or to offer help.
To clarify the factual content of your official statement, that you are not willing to criticise the incorrect working methods of your immediate German judge colleagues, requires an official statement on your position for the further legal course, whether you meant inform where that you collaborate with the responsible family judges or whether you will independently  take legal measures against your German judge colleagues of the district court of Wilhelmshaven.
Your praiseworthy start as a German judge to want to stand your historical responsibility, in particular in the context of national socialistic school of thought and it’s resurrection in the judiciary of the Federal Republic of Germany is greeted as a praiseworthy start.
In your position of "independence" you are free to decide to deliberately further the resurrection of national socialistic shoal of thought in the judiciary of the Federal Republic of Germany or to with the available democratic legal measures clearly and correctly to oppose them.
Your praiseworthy start in the recognition, that the applicant speaks out and acts against the criminal activities of German judge should be greeted as a praiseworthy start.
The following is brought to your attention in regards to the factual content of the resurrection of national socialistic school of thought in the judiciary of the federal Republic of Germany and amongst German authorities.
German judges have promoted Hitler and National Socialism.
German judges and jurists with the judiciary apparatus have served as a terror instrument on the one hand, for the unscrupulous implementation of the propagated political aims as well as on the other hand for the oppression and silencing of resistance and opposition with obedience to the Fuehrer Adolf Hitler.
German judges and jurists have covered each other when it was about assuming responsibilities for the German Crimes against Humanity.

Der anschließende Hochverratsprozeß gegen Hitler, Ludendorff und andere geriet zu einer Farce. Die Angeklagten durften Propagandareden gegen die Republik und ihre Politiker halten; der Ankläger agierte eher als Verteidiger. Am 1. April 1924 wurde Ludendorff freigesprochen, Hitler erhielt fünf Jahre Festungshaft mit der Aussicht auf Begnadigung nach sechs Monaten, die übrigen Angeklagten kamen mit noch geringeren Strafen davon. Das Gericht lehnte es ausdrücklich ab, den NSDAP-Führer gemäß den Bestimmungen des Republikschutzgesetzes als wegen Hochverrats verurteilten Ausländer nach Österreich abzuschieben: Bei einem Mann, "der so deutsch denkt und fühlt wie Hitler" und der sich durch "rein vaterländischen Geist und edelsten Willen" auszeichne, komme diese Maßnahme nicht in Frage.
Kampf um die Republik 1919-1923; Informationen zur politischen Bildung (Heft 261)
Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung- Reinhard Sturm

In einem Gemeinwesen, das den Staat als Mittel der nationalsozialistischen Weltanschauung ansieht, ist das Gesetz Plan und Wille des Führers...Der deutsche Rechtswahrer ist heute Mitarbeiter des Führer. Nationalsozialistisches Recht und Plan und Wille des Führers können nur von Nationalsozialisten erkannt und gewahrt werden. Der Führer ist nicht Staatsorgan, sondern oberster Gerichtsherr der Nation und höchster Gesetzgeber...
- Staatsrechtler Carl Schmitt
Ich werde dem Führer des deutschen Reiches und Volkes, Adolf Hitler, treu und gehorsam sein, die Gesetze beachten und meine Amtspflichten gewissenhaft erfüllen, so wahr mir Gott helfe.
- auf den Führer verpflichten
- "Mein Führer!
Ihnen, meinen Führer, bitte ich melden zu dürfen: das Amt, das Sie mir verliehen haben, habe ich angetreten und mich inzwischen eingearbeitet.
Mein Dank für die Verantwortung, die Sie mir anvertraut haben, soll darin bestehen, daß ich treu und mit aller Kraft an der Sicherheit des Reiches und der inneren Geschlossenheit des deutschen Volkes durch eigenes Beispiel als Richter und als Führer der Männer des Volksgerichtshofs arbeite, stolz, Ihnen, mein Führer, dem obersten Gerichtsherrn und Richter des deutschen Volkes, für die Rechtsprechung Ihres höchsten politischen Gerichtes verantwortlich zu sein.
Der Volksgerichtshof wird sich stets bemühen, so zu urteilen, wie er glaubt, daß Sie, mein Führer, den Fall selbst beurteilen würden.
Heil mein Führer! In Treue, Ihr politischer Soldat Roland Freisler."
- Dies schrieb Freisler am 15. 10. 1942, wenige Wochen nach seiner Ernennung zum Präsidenten des Volksgerichtshofs. Zitiert nach Heribert Ostendorf, "Roland Freisler – Mörder im Dienste Hitlers", in: Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 5/1994, S. 169
It would be reasonably expected that you as "honest and decent Germans" certainly know German history.
Nevertheless, for completion of the file, the background and content of the nazi child abduction, alienation and Germanisation programs will be explicitly named.
In the German history of deliberate aggressive and anti-human violations of international law, the Nazis intentionally apply state organised child abduction and alienation in order to implement their national socialist demographic and racial political goals.
Thereby children abducted into the Third Reich are subjected to alienation and programming in order to speed up the wanted process of Germanisation.
Socio-political factors as backgrounds are among others that the implementation of state political aims (e.g. war of aggression and conquering, extension of the available soil for the people with simultaneous demand for domination by the master race) is opposed by an insufficient birth rate and that the elevation of the own race as the superior declared race demands the oppression and eradication of foreign race characteristics.
The content analysis of literature about the state run child abduction and alienation program of the Nazis provides the following aspects whose re-appearances within the current practice by German authorities in international child abduction and boycott of access has to be checked on parallels :
--- Child abduction
--- Alienation
--- Racism
--- Germanisation
--- Manipulation of files
In the first quarter of the 20th century, the Nazis conducted a state run child abduction and alienation program as part of their Germanisation plan. As a result of the Nuremberg Trials, and after nearly two years of study, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted on 9th December, 1948, a Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. In this Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national ethnical, racial or religious group, as such : [...] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Those who cannot learn from the past are condemned to repeat it. In the last quarter of the 20th century, the German government does not prosecute those German judicial, social and administrative German state authorities which are involved in legalising international child abduction to Germany and resulting boycott of access.
In the proceedings against Ulrich Greifelt and others of the UNITED STATES MILITARY TRIBUNAL in Nuremberg from 10. October 1947 until 10. March 1948 leading SS-members from the group around Heinrich Himmler have been condemned due to crimes against humanity among others on account of child abduction.
In the German history of international child abduction, the proceedings of judicial, social and administrative authorities of Lower Saxony already have a fixed famous place due to their documented low conscience of injustice and due to certain traditional family law practice. The proceedings of authorities of Lower Saxony in cases of international child abduction have already provoked the intervention of the French President Jacques Chirac and the US-President Bill Clinton.

Order to refrain to the German judge Huelsebusch
The previously described praiseworthy start of the German judge Huelsebusch are not in conformance with his documented behaviour, in particular in his historic responsibility as a German judge.
Hereby the official invitation is handed to the district court of Wilhelmshaven under the moral and political responsibility of the director Kahlen, to instruct the German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven to refrain from insulting, threatening and coercing the applicant because the applicant speaks out against the resurrection of national socialistic school of thought in the judiciary of the Federal Republic of Germany and German Authorities.
Obviously the German judge Huelsebusch as documented intends to voice his political opinion, that nazi injustice and nazi terror as well as the acting before national socialist background should not be stopped by legal remedies in the Federal Republic of Germany.
In this regard there is exists without doubt a need for clarification and reasoning.
Certainly the German judge in his "independence" has the right to institute legal measures against the applicant, because the applicant clearly speaks out against the resurrection of national socialistic school of thought in the judiciary of the Federal Republic of Germany and German Authorities but also legal remedies against anti democratic behaviour and working methods in a Germany, that according to the constitution serves the freedom of the world in a united Europe.
It may be put into question for the time being, in how far the German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven out of ground of affinity considers to further PROMOTE national socialistic school of thought. The magnitude of his true intentions the German judge Huelsebusch can present in a substantiated declaration for the further legal course.
Declaration of intent of the German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven

PLEASE DELETE WHAT IS INAPPROPRIATE

Hereby the official request for your official statement and declaration of intent within the usual legal delay of two weeks in the frame of your independence in a democratic society.
Your official statement and declaration of intent is needed to be correctly announced with the official stamp of the district court of Wilhelmshaven which will be used for further political and judicial proceedings at the national and the international level.
1 a) The German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven hereby officially declares, that he collaborates with the German family judges of the district court of Wilhelmshaven, in particular with the incorrect working methods of judge Staubwasser in international child abduction and boycott of access.
1 b) The German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven hereby officially declares, that he does not collaborate with the family judges of the district court of Wilhelmshaven, but that he distances himself from the responsible family judges of the district court  of Wilhelmshaven. To officially and correctly distance himself from these family judges of the district court of Wilhelmshaven, the German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven will institute legal measures against the responsible these family judges of the district court of Wilhelmshaven, so that these these family judges of the district court of Wilhelmshaven can correctly assume responsibility for their documented incorrect actions in international child abduction, boycott of access and alienation.
2 a) The German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven hereby officially declares, that he collaborates with Heinrich Himmler as well as with the convicted SS-Fuehrern out of the group of Heinrich Himmler, that were convicted by the Nuremberg Tribunal on the grounds of crimes against humanity, in particular child abduction, boycott of access and alienation alternatively forced Germanisation.
The German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven hereby officially declares that he explicitly distances himself from the nazi regime and the national socialistic school of thought. To officially and correctly distance himself from national socialistic school of thought in the legal practice and in the legal reality of the Federal Republic of Germany, the German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven is to institute legal measures against all still living jurists, that served the nazi regime. On the grounds of the particular understanding of democracy and the constitutional state principle of the German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven, Mr Huelsebusch will institute further legal measures against all judges of the Federal Republic of Germany, that acquitted the judges of the nazi regime.
3a) The German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven hereby officially declares, that he uses his historical responsibility, that judge Huelsebusch collaborates with the German judges that under a German constitution intentionally promoted, Adolf Hitler, national socialism and the 2 world war.
3b) The German judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven hereby officially declares, that he uses his historical responsibility, that judge Huelsebusch collaborates with the German judges that under a German constitution intentionally promoted, Adolf Hitler, national socialism and the 2 world war. To officially and to correctly document that he distances himself from the German judges that promoted Adolf Hitler, national socialism and the second world war judge Huelsebusch will institute legal remedies against the responsible German judges and Adolf Hitler, so that they may correctly assume the responsibility for their unjust acts and for their crimes against humanity. The German judge Huelsebusch so by engages in the praiseworthy act with civil courage that has been encouraged by the former Justice Minister of Lower Saxony Christian Pfeiffer. . Not only that the German judge Huelsebusch supports the annulment of nazi judgements, as well as recompensation of the victims of nazi injustice, nazi terror but judge Huelsebusch speaks out explicitly for the historical working off with both the civil and criminal prosecution of the nazi perpetrators.

Official applications to the district court of Wilhelmshaven

Hereby the legal demand in regards to a disciplinary enquiry and disciplinary measures to be instituted against the German judge Huelsebusch. The German judge Huelsebusch engages himself as documented in insult, treat and coercion against the applicant because he speaks out against the resurrection of national socialistic national socialist school of thought in the Federal Republic of Germany in the judiciary and amongst German Authorities.
As documented and proven the district court of Wilhelmshaven under the moral and political responsibility of the director Mr. Kahlen lets the foreign father as well as the tax payer invest in procedures in regards to access, who’s court ordered access with the children abducted to Germany has deliberately not been enforced for a period of two years and court proceedings which have been deliberately delayed for a period of one year.
The district court of Wilhelmshaven under the moral and political responsibility of the director Mr. Kahlen documents on the one hand, that the German Judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven blames the applicant for the inadmissible comparison between the historical crimes against humanity by the nazi jurists and the crimes against humanity in the practice of German family law.
The district court of Wilhelmshaven under the moral and political responsibility of the director Mr. Kahlen documents on the other hand, that the German Judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven who is paid in the name of the people in a democratic constitutional state, has to date not instituted legal measures against nazis, nazi jurists and their crimes against humanity.
The district court of Wilhelmshaven under the moral and political responsibility of the director Mr. Kahlen documents on the other hand, that the German Judge Huelsebusch of the district court of Wilhelmshaven who is paid in the name of the people in a democratic constitutional state, has to date not instituted legal measures against his German judge colleague Staubwasser of the district court of Wilhelmshaven and against his documented incorrect working methods.
Hereby the official application to the district court of Wilhelmshaven for the German judge Huelsebusch to hand in the following within the usual legal delay of two weeks:
--- The naming of the employees and the respective individual insults in accordance with the vision and statement of the German judge Huelsebusch for further legal action.
--- The naming of the individual incorrect working  methods in international child abduction and boycott of access of each and every German judicial, social, and administrative employee, as well as the official declaration of the German judge Huelsebusch as to whether he collaborates with or distances himself with legal measures.
--- The answer to the declaration of intent.
Legal demand to refrain from the attempt of inciting the petitioner of the child to the criminal offence of child trafficking
Hereby the official legal demand is entered to refrain from the attempt to incite the petitioner and father of the child to acts of criminal offences in trafficking of children and humans by intentionally generating turnover and profit of judicial business with the incorrect proceedings by German authorities in child abduction, boycott of access and misuse of authority.

Dear Mr Kahlen director of the district court of Wilhelmshaven,
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the district court of Wilhelmshaven,

Criminal charges against Heinrich Himmler due to child abduction
and crimes against humanity

In accordance with the official guideline of the German federal ministry of Justice (FILE NUMBER R B 3 - zu: 9311/22-2-23 335/2033 from 14 April 2003) as well as in accordance with the criminal law procedure regulations criminal charges against Heinrich Himmler are entered directly at the district court of Wilhelmshaven at the director of the district court of Wilhelmshaven on the grounds of child abduction and crimes against humanity. The applicant engages himself in praiseworthy activities with civil courage, that was encouraged by the previous justice minister of Lower Saxony, Christian Pfeiffer. Not only that the applicant supports the annulment of nazi judgements, as well as recompensation of the victims of nazi injustice, nazi terror but the applicant speaks out explicitly for the historical working off with both the civil and criminal prosecution of the nazi perpetrators.
The judges of the district court of Wilhelmshaven are free in their "independence" in regards to their own individual political convictions and understanding of democracy and the constitutional state to independently institute legal remedies against the nazi perpetrator Heinrich Himmler.

Dear Mrs. Astrid Vockert,
Vice president of the Parliament of Lower Saxony,
Dear Madams, Dear Sirs at the Parliament of Lower Saxony,

The document presented is to be entered to the official petitions PET 00447/08/15 PET 05816/11/14 as well as to open new petition procedures at the Parliament of Lower Saxony as requested.
Hereby the official application, that the Parliament of Lower Saxony oversee the proceedings against nazis and the nazi school of thought at the judicial authorities of both Wilhelmshaven and Oldenburg.
Hereby the official petition in accordance with article §17 of German basic law for a complaint to the supervision authority with disciplinary measures including the release for office in respect to the German judge Huelsebusch. The German judge Huelsebusch engages himself in documented insult, threat and coercion against the applicant , because the applicant speaks out against the resurrection  of nazi school of thought in the judiciary and German authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany.
A German court that directly causes costs for the applicant and the tax payer in custody and access proceedings, while German judges and German courts as documented at the district court of Wilhelmshaven in the matter of international child abduction to Germany and the boycott of access that follows over a time period of one year, deliberate delays proceedings and deliberately does not enforce court ordered access over a period of two years, an on the grounds of the wasting of tax money in no way justify it‘s existence.
Hereby the official petition in accordance with article §17 of German basic law to the Parliament of Lower Saxony, for the immediate closing of the district court of Wilhelmshaven and to distribute it’s tasks to other competent courts in Lower Saxony.

Dear Dr. Busch, Mrs. Bakker, Mr. Wessels, Mrs. Ballnus,
Dear Madams, Dear Sirs at the Justice Ministry of Lower Saxony,

The document presented is to be entered to the official complaint cycle under the complaint numbers 4121 E -S4. 54/03 and 3700 E - 204.37/03 at the Justice Ministry of Lower Saxony.
Hereby the official application, that the Justice Ministry of Lower Saxony oversee the proceedings against nazis and the nazi school of thought at the judicial authorities of both Wilhelmshaven and Oldenburg.
Hereby the official legal application for a disciplinary enquiry with disciplinary measures including the release for office in respect to the German judge Huelsebusch. The German judge Huelsebusch engages himself in documented insult, threat and coercion against the applicant , because the applicant speaks out against the resurrection  of nazi school of thought in the judiciary and German authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Dear Mrs. Marita Sehn, chairwoman of the petitions commission of the German Federal Parliament,
As proven and documented as the example from Wilhelmshaven and Oldenburg, German judicial social and administrative authorities involved in international child abduction to Germany and the boycott of access that follows engage in racism and hate of strangers in their behaviour and working methods. Whereas the human rights commissioner of the Federal Republic of Germany at the Federal Justice Ministry, Klaus Stoltenberg officially states the opposite in international and human rights issues.
 Hereby the official petition to the German Federal Parliament handed into the appropriate highest Federal Authority for examination, here the Federal Ministry of Justice for the immediate release of Mr. Klaus Stoltenberg from the office of human rights commissioner of the Federal Republic of Germany at the Justice Ministry.
In light of the publications presented by the Federal Ministry of Justice such as information brochures, behavioural guidelines and legal projects it is to be checked in how far protection is offered to victims of child abduction, boycott of access and alienation and will be improved in the future.
In the same way the initiatives of the Federal Justice Ministry for the payment of reparations to the victims of child abduction are to be examined.
In the same way the initiatives of the Federal Justice Ministry for the transparent historical working of the nazi steered child abduction and alienation programs are to be examined.
Hereby the official application, that the German Bundestag oversee the proceedings against nazis and the nazi school of thought at the judicial authorities of both Wilhelmshaven and Oldenburg.
Hereby the official application is made to integrate the online documentation presented into the internet presence of the German Federal Parliament Online-Documentation:http://www.michael-hickman.org

Yours faithfully
 
Michael Hickman
Voluntary Independent Special Rapporteur
on the situation of
Human Rights in Germany
to the United Nations and
to the European Institutions


Related Subject Matter: