Complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, in STRASBOURG, FRANCE, against the French state for refusing an “independent”, “impartial” and “fair” court (Article 6 of the European Convention) owing to the fact that there exists within the French judicial machinery a Zionist faction who is instructed with repressing the exposing the genocide of the Palestinian people by the Zionists and is thus an accessory to the said genocide.
By Michel DAKAR
Paris, on December the 8th, 2006
The European Court of Human Rights,
Complaint against the French state for refusing an “independent”, “impartial” and “fair” court (Article 6 of the European Convention) owing to the fact that:
There exists within the French judicial machinery a Zionist faction who is instructed with repressing my exposing the genocide of the Palestinian people by the Zionists and is thus an accessory to the said genocide.
I accuse a faction of the French magistrates of being suborned by the Zionists and, consequently, of being a party to the genocide of the Palestinian people by the said Zionists.
I have just been fined by a court because I had made a petition challenging such Paris judges as M. Nicolas BONNAL, Mme Anne-Marie SAUTERAUD and M. Marc BAILLY, all belonging to the 17th division of the Paris Court, which deals with affairs involving the press. As a matter-of-fact, I must appear before the said three judges soon, under the charge that I devised and made public the by-laws of an association opposing all forms of racism and genocide - which naturally include the genocide of the Palestinian people by the Zionists and the Zionist ideology itself insofar as it is a manifestation of racial hatred.
It has to be known that Judge Nicolas BONNAL follows the training dispensed by CRIF (Council Representing the Jewish Establishments in France), which is the leading agency of the French Zionists, its principal task being to facilitate a successful completion of the genocide of the Palestinian people.
In the said petition I challenged the competence of the above-mentioned judges in passing sentence upon me in 2004 under the pretext that I was an anti-Semite and denied a crime against humanity because I denounced the genocide of the Palestinian people. Now, as that action should have been barred by the statute of limitations, the corresponding judgment could only be obtained through the said judges’ turning a blind eye to a wholesale tampering with the documents of my case.
Such tampering with an official record, which, in French Law, is a crime which must be answered before the assizes, was carried out by policemen belonging to the police squad of rue du Château-des-Rentiers in the 13th District of Paris, so aptly designated as the squad for “protection against interference with the rights of private persons”, which was then under the orders of Police Inspector (commissaire) Thomas de RICOLFIS, who has since taken charge of a European ‘anti-terrorist’ organization. Police Inspector de RICOLFIS was assisted by Captain Jean-François VAN de VEN and Commander (commandant) Gisèle ARBAUD-BOGGIO. The name of this police squad is for ever changing (BEAP, BASLP, and BRDP). It is under the direct orders of the so-called ‘Public Liberties’ A4 Section of the office of the Paris public prosecutor. This means that tampering with the documents of my case must have been implemented under the direct responsibility of the then public prosecutor for the Paris area, M. Yves BOT, who has since become Attorney General attached to the Paris Court of Appeal, and that of M. BOT’s deputies, MM. David PEYRON and François CORDIER.
It has to be known that Deputy Public Prosecutor François CORDIER also follows the training dispensed by CRIF and that he also played a part in the present case.
It has to be known that as soon as I registered the by-laws of the association opposing all forms of genocide and of racism, at the headquarters of the Paris police, I was summoned to a civil division of the Paris County Court (tribunal de grande instance) by the Paris public prosecutor, who demanded the winding up of the association. That demand was rejected by the county court and was likewise rejected on appeal and it seems that the public prosecutor and his deputies did not lodge an appeal with the French Supreme Court.
It has to be known that the legal proceedings instituted by the public prosecutor and his deputies in order to obtain the winding up of the anti-racist and anti-genocide association were totally illegal and even went against the French Constitution.
It has to be known that although two court decisions ordered that the creation of the association be published in the official gazette (Journal officiel) such publication has been denied both by the headquarters of the Paris police, which are headed by M. Pierre MUNTZ, a former gendarme, and by the directors of the official gazette, who report to the Prime Minister, M. Dominique de VILLEPIN, even though the official gazette cashed the check given for the said publication - which is tantamount to stealing.
After this setback, the Paris public prosecutor and his deputies, acting no doubt under the orders of CRIF to which it is obvious that the Minister of Justice, M. Pascal CLEMENT, is also totally subjected, started two legal actions, hoping no doubt that by obtaining a couple of judgments against us they would ultimately succeed in winding up the association by administrative means.
One of these two legal actions is taking place in Paris and, as it happens, it has been brought before two of the very three judges whom I objected to in my petition, a request for which I have been sentenced to a fine.
It has to be known that the legal proceedings brought before the said two judges also go against the French Constitution, for in France the by-laws of an association can be freely written and their publication is also free; therefore neither their writing nor their publication can bring about any legal action.
The venue of the other action has been moved to Versailles, for it involves Deputy Public Prosecutor Sylvie KACHANER, from the Paris public prosecutor’s office, who had written the addresses to the Court for the illegal demand requesting the winding up of the association.
As a matter-of-fact, I have posted on the Internet a critical review of the said addresses to the Court.
It is because of this public criticism of an illegal document, a document that went against the French Constitution even, that I was prosecuted in Versailles and was sentenced before the district court presided by Judge Philippe DAVID.
In order to obtain this sentence, Judge Philippe DAVID must have made the very indictment by the Minister of Justice, M. Pascal CLEMENT, that is to say the principal document in the Versailles file, disappear.
The reason why this indictment by the Minister of Justice was vanished by Judge Philippe DAVID is that such an unfounded complaint could, on the one hand, have caused the legal action to be annulled but, on the other hand, had it not been annulled, it might, for the first time, have compelled a public mention of the fact that a genocide was taking place in Palestine.
In Law, Judge Philippe DAVID’s sleigh-of-hand could be termed a forgery of public records, which again is a crime which must be answered before the assizes. I have lodged a complaint to that effect, which the Paris public prosecutor has referred to the Versailles public prosecutor, and I have also lodged a complaint against the Minister of Justice with the Court of Justice of the French Republic, on the grounds of the Minister’s refusal to act against Judge Philippe DAVID for filching the Minister’s complaint.
It has to be known that the scheming of Judge Philippe DAVID was assisted by the Paris public prosecutor and his deputies, who prevented me from accessing the documents of the Paris case for nine months, as the said documents included a letter from Deputy Public Prosecutor Sylvie KACHANER, the content of which would have compelled a public debate about the ongoing genocide in Palestine and brought to light the denial of that very genocide by the judiciary.
I am reproducing this significant letter below.
It is to be noted that in order to justify my 2004 conviction Judges Nicolas BONNAL, Anne-Marie SAUTERAUD and Marc BAILLY wrote that it was libelous to accuse the Israeli of genocide and war crimes in Palestine, that Deputy Public Prosecutor Sylvie KACHANER declared that it was nonsense to say that there was a genocide of the Palestinian people and that, on his part, Judge Philippe DAVID declared in the Versailles decision rendering passing sentence upon me that there was no specific fact relating to a genocide in Palestine.
It has to be known also that the judges of the Court of Appeal of Paris condoned in like fashion the ‘forgery of public records’ perpetrated by the Paris public prosecutor and his deputies and by the police squad of the rue du Château-des-Rentiers. These judges are Mme Laurence TREBUCQ, M. LAYLAVOIX and Mme PLANA; and the same also goes for the judge of the crime division of the French Supreme Court of Appeal, M. Bruno COTTE.
It has to be known moreover that those last four judges have had in their hands the complaint I lodged for forgery of public records in which I denounced this tampering with public documents, since the said complaint was sent to them and attached to the documents of my file.
It has to be known that I am still likely to be subpoenaed to appear before the same judges in the Paris court.
It has to be known that the senior examining magistrate, Mme Fabienne POUS, made a ruling fixing at 6000 Euro the amount I should pay in order to have my complaint for forgery examined.
It has to be known that what the native population of Palestine must suffer from the Zionists exactly meets the specifications of the UN Convention of 9 December 1948 “for prevention and repression of the crime of genocide” as well as those of Article 211-1 of the French Penal Code, which represses genocide, as the said article is couched in exactly the same terms as the said Convention, an article which the Zionist genocide-mongering faction among the French magistrates is busy ignoring.
For all these reasons, I ask the Court to condemn France for non-compliance with Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights and to pay me such monies which the Court shall see fit to be paid in order to provide with funds the CODEIG (Compréhension et dépassement de l’idée de génocide) (Understanding and Going beyond the Idea of Genocide) association, the winding up of which is requested by the Zionists via their go-betweens in the Ministry of Justice, in the Paris public prosecutor’s office and among the judges they suborned.
1 - Petition for challenging the competence [of certain judges] addressed to the Presiding judge of the Paris Court of Appeal, M. Renaud CHAZAL DE MAURIAC.
2 – Order from the Presiding judge of the Paris Court of Appeal.
3 – Copy of Mme Sylvie KACHANER’s letter (see the transcription of the said letter on pages 6 and 7 of this petition).
4 - Order of the senior examining magistrate in Paris, Mme Fabienne POUS, setting at 6000 euros the amount to be paid upfront in order to engage an examination of my complaint for forgery of public records.
5 – A copy of the UN Convention of 9 December 1948.
There is no recourse in French Law against an order from the Presiding judge of the Court of Appeal pronouncing judgment in a matter of competence.
I have not brought this case before any other competent international jurisdiction [yet].
On November 3rd, 2005
The fact that the said site was created at all, as well as the content of the remarks posted on the said Web site, are the direct reason the Public Prosecutor caused to be delivered, through me and under my signature, a summons on a fixed date against an individual named Michel DAKAR, so that the winding up of his association may be ordered, because the purpose of the said association goes against public order, namely because it has an anti-Semite character.
Upon M. CORDIER’s instructions, to whom the headquarters of Police applied in the person of Mme Françoise MOTHES, I prepared a draft assignation which was filled in by the Assistant Public Prosecutor for the technical part. The said assignation was delivered to the person concerned and the hearing was set for the end of July, before the formation of judges presided by M. GONDRAN DE ROBERT. At this hearing, the Public prosecutor was represented by our Section Chief, Mme VENET, for I was on vacation at that time.
As the Court did not order the winding up of the association, it was decided to appeal against this sentence.
I has been some weeks that a lengthy text mentioning my name on all pages - and often several times in the same page - is accessible to all on a Web site on which my name is linked to such words as ‘genocide’ and ‘Palestine’.
One can read that “Mme KACHANER is perceptibly an accomplice of the genocide-mongers and she will be judged in turn, not for merely contesting an historical point of view but for actual complicity in a genocide, for which hanging was the retribution in 1945” (page 7), or, again, ‘Mme KACHANER is visibly an ardent champion of the State of Israel; she is no longer a deputy public prosecutor of the French Republic but one such for that infamous theocratic, racist and genocide-mongering state … ».
It is obvious that I do not wish to see my name linked to such nonsense nor risk to see my family exposed to a show-down which, taking into account the eminently sensitive character of the subject mentioned, might at any moment slip into an uncontrolled spin.
Mme VENET, to whom I opened my mind about this problem, shared my analysis and immediately sent an e-mail informing the Assistant Public Prosecutor and the Attorney General, in the person of Mme TERRIER-MAREUIL, but there has been no answer so far.
It seems to me, however, that such facts must not pass unnoticed and that, insofar as these attacks are the direct result of my putting into act certain instructions from my superiors seeking to obtain the winding up of the association, in my opinion the response can only be effected by the establishment since it is in my capacity as deputy public prosecutor that I am thus implicated.
A the first hearing, Mme Mireille VENET, who was grasping for words while browsing through a file she obviously had not opened before, made no bones about fabricating an excerpt which is nowhere to be found in the by-laws of the association (that of ‘genocide-mongering Jews’) … anyone who wants to drown his dogs declares it has rabies; as for Mme Sylvie KACHANER, she did not deign to come to the Versailles hearing (being still on vacation no doubt).