Table of Contents.

The European Court of Human Rights.

I have addressed a case in the European Court of Human Rights:

My complaint to the Court on the 26th of February 2011:
"I have been monitored by the Swedish Police since the early 90's. I believe that the surveillance is illegal because it violates the Police Act § 8. I don't know why I'm monitored. I have asked the Police to send an excerpt from any notes that are about me in the Police's records. This has been denied me because of confidentiality. I have requested that Justitiekanslern and Justitieombudsmannen should take part of the records that exist of me with the Police. This has been denied me. I have never been prosecuted for any crime. I have never been questioned by the Police. I have never participated in any political activities. I am just an ordinary person living with my family in a suburb of Stockholm. There is no legal basis for the surveillance. It's only a matter of defamation. My phone is monitored. My emails are monitored. My internet activities are monitored. My letters are opened. My car is bugged (GSM bug). I think that the Swedish government has violated Article 8 of the Convention, the right to respect for private and family life."

The court has submitted its verdict on 26th of January 2012:

"I write to inform you that on 22 of March 2012 the European Court of Human Rights, sitting in a single - judge formation (A. Nuβberger assisted by a rapporteur in accordance with Article 24 § 2 of the Convention) , decide to declare inadmissible in your application lodged on 15 March 2011 and registered under the above mentioned number.

In light of all material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of were within its competence, the Court found that the criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention have not been met.

This decision is final. It is not subject to any appeal either to the Grand Chamber or to any other body. The Registry is unable to provide you with any further details concerning the Single Judge's decision. Consequently, you will not receive any further correspondence from the Court in connection with this case. In accordance with the Court's instructions, the file will be destroyed one year after the date of the Single Judge's decision. “

My comment on the above:
The outcome of the case was expected. Already in the early stages (the spring of 2011) , I received indications that my complaint would be dismissed. The reason for this is spelled CIA. They can buy themselves out of difficulties when they occur. In such a context, the human rights has no worth. Along the way, I have on numerous occasions been subject to veiled threats. How many times have I been dead and buried ? I've lost count.The Court's proceedings have been miserable. The Court has requested me, by letter, to send documents I already submitted. The processing has been slow. In a letter dated the 25th August 2011 administrator Anders Månsson writes:

"In this context, I would emphasize the need to avoid delay and to emphasize that if you fail to provide the requested documents within six months, will your act, without further notice, be destroyed. Extension of this period is not possible."

As appears from the verdict that the reasons for it are covered up. The court doesn't respond to my claims in my complaint on one single point! This is similar to the procedure of courts located in countries that are not considered as legally safe . In Sweden, we take the human rights for granted. Yet the fact is that when authorizes and politicians are having the CIA as "playmate" anything can happen. I understand from the Court's verdict that it's OK for continued harassment and surveillance. What I suffered is an unprecedented indignity.

My conclusion is: The European Court of Human Rights is a corrupt institution completely infiltrated by Nazis.