Authorities and judicial scandals VIII

A pupil “disappears” from a school. Neither the school nor the school authorities, even two years later, want to know where the pupil has gone. Attempts at clarification fail because those involved either cover up or block. This is the  testimony of the authority in court:

"The pupil did not come to school after the autumn holiday". "A deregistration did not take place". 

Proof (see below): HH4

Everything that can go wrong, illegal and fraudulent with those responsible can be proven to them.

But there is then no getting through. The filed suit will be delayed for over 1.5 years and will not be processed. Attempts of those responsible to “withdraw” the lawsuit fail. An "oral hearing" should take place. It quickly turns out that it is not about finding justice and law, but about violation of law and covering up the unlawfulness, untruthful information, falsification of those involved.

The procedure turns out to be like: The "independent" judge and the authority against the citizen. The judge is pointed out several times, without success.

The school authority brings in files including factual files.

For the third year now, the school authority “knows” still about “nothing”. The statement from the school authority:

"According to the file, there is no information on this".

Why one would like to have such an "clueless" employee and "meaningless" files sent to the court remains "unclear".

The judge's duty of neutrality has now been completely lost. He represents the interests of the school authority. The judge shouts tactlessly. Then he insults you racially. The summit was now reached. The procedure is terminated immediately.

Documents are withheld and access to the files is denied. The authorities and courts continue to report deliberately false and untruthful.

After almost four years, documents should be inspected. A presidential judge is responsible for this. An incomplete and chaotic "file" is given for the "inspection". Various documents, written paper etc relevant to the decision, which were the subject of the "oral hearing", are suddenly no longer to be found. The court is still trying to cheat and to call it "access to the files". The attempt fails. The procedures are recorded in writing and handed over to the court, with success. 

It is recorded in writing that documents are missing and files are incomplete.

Proof: HH5

Files and verifiable other documents are presented to the school authority.

Proof: HH6

This is what a Mr. Jan Wittg from the school authorities say in court ("There are no documents and files").

Proof: HH7

Authorities lie, courts let them pass.

Is that the rule of law in Germany?


A Ms. Schefzig, who otherwise has a number of deficiencies, attempts at deception and nonsense, is now responsible at the administrativ court.

You enlighten Ms. Schefzig in detail. You inform her and present her with evidence that Jan Wittig's statements from the school authorities are lies, but without success.

Ms. Schefzig arbitrarily conceals all this.

You then demand that Mr. Jan Wittig from the school authority swears in lieu of an oath his statements made in court (he has "no" documents, "no" files and "no" school reports).

With such an insurance before the court, Mr. Jan Wittig can expect a prison sentence of up to three years or a fine if he submits it incorrectly or makes false statements in relation to such insurance.

Mr. Jan Wittig from the scholl authority is now suddenly quiet and he has disappeared.

To be continued.