De Zutphense (ver)hoormethode representatief voorbeeld van "corruptie coalities rechtbanken, Raad voor de Kinderbescherming en jeugdzorg" in Nederland

This complaint was already received at your Office on 5 september 2008 in ENGLISH language and returned with a letter "After careful consideration of the contents of your petion (communicatyion/complaint) we sincerely regret having to inform you that the Inited Nations Office of the Hight Commissioner for Human Rights is not in a position to assist you in the matter you raise, for the reasons indicated on the back of this letter: "The Human Rights Committee is not generally in a positions to review the evaluation of facts and evidence bij the national courts and authorities, nor can it review the interpretation of domestic legislation" along with Human Right Civil and Political Rights: The Human Rights Committee Fact Sheet n 15 (Rev) 1 and Complaint procedures Fact Sheet no. 7

                   NATIONS UNIES                                 UNITED NATIONS  

HAUT COMMISSARIAT AUX DROITS DE L'HOMME J L^v HIGH FOR HUMAN RIGHTS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Address:
Palais des Nations
CH-1211 GENEVE 10

REFERENCE: 0150215/5! I^:           ,(GEN)

5 September 2008

Dear Sir/Madame,

After careful consideration of the contents of your petition (communication / complaint), we sincerely regret having to inform you that the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is not in a position to assist you in the matter you raise, for the reasons indicated on the back of this letter. Accordingly, your petition is being returned to you.

Please accept our apologies for not replying in a more personal manner. You may

understand that, while we appreciate your reasons for writing to us, the existing procedures require that it is ascertained whether certain preliminary criteria are satisfied before proceeding with the examination of a petition.

For information about the procedures for the examination of individual petitions on human rights violations, please consult our website: www.ohchr.org, direct link: http://www2.ohchr.org/engljshfbodjes/petjtions/index.htm.

If you have difficulty accessing our website, please write to the UNHCHR, Information Office PW-RS-0 11, 1211 Geneva 10, and ask for Human Rights Fact Sheets Nos. 7, 12, 15 and

17.

Yours sincerely,

The Petitions Unit  

1.    The Human Rights Committee cannot examine petitions alleging violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Politica! Rights (ICCPR) unless the State is also a party to the Optional Protocol (OP). is not a State party to the Optional Protocol.

2.    The Committee against Torture cannot examine petitions alleging violations of the

Convention against Torture (CAT) unless the State has made the declaration under article 22

recognizing the Committee's competence to receive and consider petitions.

has not made the declaration.

3.     The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination cannot examine petitions alleging violations of the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) unless the State has made the declaration under article 14 recognizing the Committee's

competente to receive and consider petitions.                                                has not made the declaration.

Considering your petition under ICCPR

4.    The State party concerned has entered a reservation to the relevant treaty as a result of which your petition cannot be examined.

5.    Your complaint is being examined or has been examined by the European Court of Human Rights, by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights or by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.

6.    The object of your petition falls outside the scope of the relevant treaty.

7.    The events complained of occurred prior to the entry into force of the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, of article 22 CAT or of article 14 CERD for the State concerned.

8.    Domestic judicial/administrative remedies do not appear to have been exhausted, and it has not been substantiated that the application of domestic remedies would be unreasonably prolonged or that the remedies would be otherwise unavailable or ineffective.  

9. XXX The Human Rights Committee is not generally in a position to review the evaluation of facts and evidence by the national courts and authorities, nor can it review the interpretation of domestic legislation.

10.   The Human Rights Committee is not generally in a position to review a sentence imposed by national courts, nor can it review the question of innocente or guilt.

11.   The Committees cannot generally examine disputen between private individuals or alleged violations of human rights that have been committed by non-state actors.

12.   The Committees can only examine individual petitions presented by the alleged victims themselves or by duly authorised representatives. Anonymous petitions cannot be considered.

13. XXX Your petition does not provide sufficient details as to the facts of your case, and/or as to how your rights under the relevant treaty have been violated.

N.B. Please note that the working languages of the Secretariat are English French, Russian and Spanish. You are therefore kindly reguested to use any of these languages in future correspondence.  

Productions:

 

10 september 2008 Complaint J. Hop The Netherlands to the United Nations. Complaint is based on International Convenant on Civil and political Rights PART III articles 14,1, 14.3, 14.4, 17 and 19 and page 26 complaint procedures Fact Sheet No 7 (Rev. 1)
712	COMPLAINT in accordance with complaint procedures Fact Sheet no. 7 COMPLAINT in accordance with Human Right Civil and Political Rights: The Human Rights Committee Fact Sheet n 15 (Rev) 1 Article 14.1: Everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing bij a competent, INDEPENDENT and impartial tribunal established by law. Article 14.3: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail in a language which he understands of the nature and cause of the charge against him Article 14.3: (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence Article 14.4: (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses, against him and to obtain the attendence and examinatation of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him Article 17: 1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. 2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks Article 19: 1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference
701	Production 1. Call Zutphen District Court for hearing without trial file for Hop in violation of Article 6 ECHR and 14 BUPO
702	Production 2. Letter J. Hop 15 oktober 2007 with a request to forward names of judges within 1 week after the date
703	Production 3. Mr. Letter Registrar October 18, 2007 with the names of the three judges: (25) Mr.. RA Eskes, (42) Mr. D. D. Vergunst (43) Mr. Madam. IGMTh Weijers-van der Marck Zutphen District Court that the case against Hop on 5 november 2007 at 09:30 hours deal
704	Production 4. Objection Hop three judges: (25) Mr.. RA Eskes, (42) Mr. D. D. Vergunst (43) Mr. Madam. IGMTh Weijers-van der Marck
705	Production 5. Letter Zutphen District Court to Hop which is informed that his request for disqualification should further motivate
706	Production 6. NO COPY process-verbal case number 89285 KGRK 07-665 Zutphen District Court hearing objection Hop avaible
707	Production 7. Pleitnotities Hop with detailed justification objection three judges: (25) Mr.. RA Eskes, (42) Mr. D. D. Vergunst (43) Mr. Madam. IGMTh Weijers-van der Marck Zutphen District Court that the case against Hop on 5 november 2007 at 09:30 hours deal
708	Production 8. Objection Hop 3 Zutphen court judges declared UNFOUNDED on 5 november 2007 zaaknr. 89285 KGRK 07-665 89285
709	History! Procedures Rb Zutphen against Hop hearing without trial file for Hop in violation of Article 6 ECHR and 14 BUPO
	Omroep Gelderland 180608 Everything from the cabinet, informative TV broadcast over the objection of the childjudge
710	History! Complaint September 1 J. Hop Ermelo (Netherlands) v unfounded objection Zutphen District Court at the United Nations
711	This complaint was already received at your Office on 5 september 2008 in ENGLISH language and returned with a letter "After careful consideration of the contents of your petion (communicatyion/complaint) we sincerely regret having to inform you that the Inited Nations Office of the Hight Commissioner for Human Rights is not in a position to assist you in the matter you raise, for the reasons indicated on the back of this letter: "The Human Rights Committee is not generally in a positions to review the evaluation of facts and evidence bij the national courts and authorities, nor can it review the interpretation of domestic legislation" along with Human Right Civil and Political Rights: The Human Rights Committee Fact Sheet n 15 (Rev) 1 and Complaint procedures Fact Sheet no. 7

Wraking van rechters wegens objectieve partijdigheid! Kinderrechters overleggen met jeugdzorg buiten hoorzitting om!
JH	Wie is Jan Hop? Antwoord: Bekijk uitzending Omroep Gelderland start afspelen uitzending op 09:28 over wraken rechters
710	Lachwekkend! Kinderbescherming zit niet meer bij rechter aan tafel. (1) (12) Lachwekkend! Nu bellen deze vertegenwoordigers van de Staat met de kinderrechter buiten de hoorzitting om voordat een verzoek wordt ingediend! (101) (124) (180) Lachwekkend! UN heeft nog steeds niet op klacht van Hop tegen Nederland beslist als representatief voorbeeld van "corruptie van coalities" tussen UN en Nederland waarbij wraking van rechters die zaak behandelen waarin zij zelf belanghebbenden zijn door de Verenigde Naties wordt afgedekt! (95)
653	1. Klacht naar President rechtbank geen ontvangstbevestiging binnen 14 dagen van ingeleverde procedure bij rechtbank 2. Klacht naar President rechtbank geen NAMEN RECHTERS in oproep vermeld
500	TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN! Hop bewijst dat rechtbanken en jeugdzorg overleggen in welke zaak Hop procesvertegenwoordiger is!
621	Het is essentieel een wrakingsverzoek van een rechter steeds in een hoger beroep op te nemen
435	Klopt de feitelijke chronologische weergave hoorzitting in het PV na WRAKING (605) van een rechter?
164	Staat in PV en beschikking welke personen zijn geweigerd bij hoorzitting achter gesloten deuren met motivatie rechtbank?
605	Wraking kinderrechter omdat de kinderrechter weigert op hoorzitting eerst op de VOORVRAGEN te beslissen
610	IDENTIFICATIEPLICHT RECHTER! Wraking rechter omdat de rechter weigert om haar/zijn naam te vertellen
611	Wraking KIR vertegenwoordiger BJZ/RVDK blijft voor/tijdens schorsing/na hoorzitting bij kinderrechter zitten
095	Wraking ongegrond maar Hop bewijst kinderrechters in Nederland zijn RECHTERS, AANKLAGERS en BELANGHEBBENDEN
621	Rechter rechtbank Zutphen heeft geen vertrouwen in collega rechters en wraakt drie rechters
489	Wraking 1, Nienhuis/Leenders WRAKEN kinderrechter met Hop als procesvertegenwoordiger
173	Wraking 2, Nienhuis/Leenders WRAKEN kinderrechter met Hop als procesvertegenwoordiger
247	Wraking 3, Nienhuis/Leenders WRAKEN kinderrechter met Hop als procesvertegenwoordiger
254	Wraking 4, Nienhuis/Leenders WRAKEN kinderrechter met Hop als procesvertegenwoordiger
226	Wraking 5, Nienhuis/Leenders WRAKEN kinderrechter met Hop als procesvertegenwoordiger
004	Wraking, Struyck wraakt kinderrechter met Hop als procesvertegenwoordiger
338	Advocaat Laura Dekker vindt kinderrechter ook partijdig en wraakt de kinderrechter!
718	Waarom zaten wethouders, raadsleden, andere kandidaten in stembureaus verkiezingen gemeenteraad 2010 met stemhokjes zonder gordijn?

Verkiezingen en verkiezingsformulieren in Nederland, problemen met partijdige rechter? U kunt ook meedoen met de provinciale verkiezingen 2011!