26 MAI 2007

Dear Mr Libicki,

On recommendation of the European Ombudsman from 04.04.2007a dn 22.05.2007 under FILE NUMBER 1047/2007/ZR, the present submission is made today on 26.05.2007 to you with amending information to the former submission from 13.05.2007.

Firstly, I would like to present to you an overview over the historical conditions of the dramatic problems concerning the disrespect for family life effected by German state authorities and especially executed by the specific state institution of the German Jugendamt.

Secondly, there a some open questions I would like to ask you regarding my former submissions for your information and for directly lodging concrete complaints against the abusive acting of the German government in the context of the European Union and of the European Council in order to cover and upheld Human Rights Violations committed by German state authorities.

Thirdly, the attachment provides the document with which I have already adressed you on 13.05.2007.

1. OVERVIEW OVER THE GERMAN HISTORICAL CONDITIONS
1.1. The National Socialist Regime of the German Third Reich
1.2. The Communist Regime of the German Democratic Republic (GDR)
1.3. The Democratic Federal Republic of Germany (FRG)
1.4. CONCLUSIONS
1.4.1. Disrespect of family life is a permanent phenomenon
1.4.2. Intervention in family life is used as a repressive state authority sanction
1.4.3. Intervention in family life is executed by the Jugendamt as one of the main system actors
2. OPEN QUESTIONS IN RESPECT TO MY FORMER SUBMISSIONS
3. ATTACHMENT

1. OVERVIEW OVER THE GERMAN HISTORICAL CONDITIONS

The roles and functional schemes of abusively applied German family politics and abusive practice of German family law jurisdiction, i.e. the German state run child abuse machinery, has a long tradition not only with the discrimination schemes ranging from the social categories of race, gender, socially disadvantaged to handicapped but also with the repression and retaliation measures against resisting parents, who are daring to challenge the German state authorities for their decision taking and acting in family matters.

There is something really wrong right within the core of the German system, which is provingly based on the historically documented fact that throughout different German political systems, there is to be observerd a certain system functionality with constant disrespect for family life. State power for the sake of children, youths and family thereby becomes abused state power within the framework of the historical so-called German child protection systems. Thus this is leading to the special perception of state terror and to the special experience of state caused misery by the victims of German state power.

The historical background of German state intervention into family life throughout different German political-administrative systems is to be described on the socio-political, judicial and historical level with the applied power instruments of social and judicial authorities as the following:

1.1. THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST REGIME OF THE GERMAN THIRD REICH

>> International child abduction of Aryan quality looking children from the occupied territories and placement into foster homes and foster families in the main part of the German Reich
>> Race hygienic experiments with children at universities and in concentration camps
>> Ideological motivated restriction or withdrawing of parental responsibility and access rights; racially motivated against Jewish parents, politically motivated against Communist parents, suppression of religious groups denying the Fuehrer-cult against Associated Bible Students
>> Arresting, killing, sending to concentration camps in cases of so-called youth delinquency concerning youth subculture such as Swing Kids, Edelweiss Pirates, White Rose
>> Clan liability and placement in foster homes of children collectively held responsible for the engagement of their fathers in the German millitary resistance after the assassination attempt against Hitler on 20. July 1944

1.2. THE COMMUNIST REGIME OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC (GDR)

>> Ideological motivated restriction or withdrawing of parental responsibility and access rights by forced adoption and placement of children into foster homes and foster families in cases of regime critics and people who are trying to escape from the GDR through the Iron Curtain
>> Placement of youths in foster re-education homes in cases of so-called youth delinquency concerning youth subculture such as Punks and other system critics

1.3. THE DEMOCRATIC FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY (FRG)

>> Problems with forced labour, physical also sexual abuse in Western Germany foster homes organised by public and private youth welfare service
>> Problems with the disrespect of the Hague Convention of Civil Aspects on International Child Abduction
>> Problems with the innerstate practice of family law jurisdiction leading to repeated violations of international law manifested by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

1.4. CONCLUSIONS

There are three constant aspects to be concluded from the debate of German human rights violations in the context of German state authority intervention into family life:

1.4.1. Disrespect of family life is a permanent phenomenon
The analytic sum-up shows that the German state run child abuse and disrespect of family life may be executed under different socio-political ideologies but that it has always been integral functional part of German political-administrative systems.

1.4.2. Intervention in family life is used as a repressive state authority sanction
The analytic sum-up also shows the similarities of methodical mechanism of repression in cases of disobedience and confrontation with the German state authorities. Whereas the restriction of parenting rights is an instrument of power control manily effected within the two German totalitarian systems (III. Reich and GDR), the observed phenomenon nowadays is that aspects of this state authority acting are also to occur in the current German democratic system of the FRG. Whenever parents or interest groups act in resistance and confrontation against the German state authorities, they will have to face the German state reaction among others in form of restricting parenting rights as a threatening and retaliation measures. System critics will get attacked by German system actors. The functionality of the German Jugendamt of these days is explained in more detail in the attachment under point 3.

1.4.3. Intervention in family life is executed by the Jugendamt as one of the main system actors
The specific state institution which is mainly executing and applying the state intervention into family life is the German Jugendamt that is acting in all German totalitarian and democratic systems for nearly a century now until today.

2. OPEN QUESTIONS IN RESPECT TO MY FORMER SUBMISSIONS

The submission from 13. April 2007 was made on recommendation of the European Ombudsman from 04.04.2007 under FILE NUMBER 00014551 as well as in reference to the Petitions of the Polish Parents [Petition 0038/2006 submitted by Wojciech Pomorski; Petition 712/2006 submitted by Lidia Jochimsen; Petition 713/2006 submitted by Beata Monika Pokrzeptowic-Meyer; Petition 848/2006 submitted by Miroslaw Kraszewski; Petition 849/2006 submitted by Brygida Pokrzeptowicz] as well as to the Petitions for the abolishment of the German Jugendamt [Petition 231/2007 submitted by the German Attorney Ingo Alberti and others]. The concern and content of this document had also been correctly lodged as a standalone petition at the European Parliament under Article 194 of the EC Treaty.

The question I would like to address to you now is, why my submission from 13. April 2007 is added to the petition 0038/2006 of Mr. Pomorski according to the answer KLC/mlh[02-COM.PETI(2007)D/26274] from 25. April 2007 by the secretariat of the committee of petitions. As far as I am informed, the petition of Mr. Pomorski deals with the discriminatory prohibition of the Polish language after separation and divorce declared by the German Jugendamt. The case of Mr. Pomorski is one individual case among many others listed in my submissions, wherein the case listings are illustrating the proven inadmissible behaviour and acting of the German Jugendamt in the European Union. It wouldn't be quite adequate to subordinate my system approach under one individual case.

My petition deals with the basic matter of the German systematic abuse of state authority and resulting human rights violations in famliy matters with the focus on the state institution of the German Jugendamt. The complaint matter of my petition is the proven inactivity of the specific state organ of the European Union, i.e. the Presidency of the Council of the European Union explicitly held by the German government. I complain that the German government with its respective federal chancellors and federal foreign ministers is clearly avoiding to tackle the German Jugendamt complex of problems and lack of quality control for the German Jugendamt within the European Union. I complain that the German government is thereby abusing its position of the Presidency of the Council of the European Union in order to cover and upheld inadmissible and abusive state intervention into family life, especially executed by the German Jugendamt.

Please, can you assign a separate number to my petition submissions and can you inform me about this number.

Kassel, Germany, 26.05.2007

Yours sincerely,
Bernd Michael Uhl
www.systemkritik.de
Human Rights Activist and System Critic

3. ATTACHMENT: SUBMISSION FROM 13. April 2007

Bernd Michael Uhl
Fuldatalstr. 33
34125 Kassel, Germany
http://www.systemkritik.de/
------------------------------------

Parlement européen
Bât. Louise Weiss
T12016
Allée du Printemps
BP 10024/F
F-67070 Strasbourg Cedex
Tel. : +33 (0)3 88 1 75934
Fax : +33 (0)3 88 1 79934

Marcin Libicki
Chairman of the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament
Rue Wirtz, Bruxelles
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/
marcin.libicki@europarl.europa.eu
marcin@libicki.pl

Parlement européen
Bât. Altiero Spinelli
04F158
60, rue Wiertz / Wiertzstraat 60
B-1047 Bruxelles/Brussel
Tel. : +32 (0)2 28 45934
Fax : +32 (0)2 28 49934

13 APRIL 2007

In reference to the German Jugendamt complex of problems

Dear Mr Libicki,

On recommendation of the European Ombudsman from 04.04.2007 under FILE NUMBER 00014551, the present submission to the European Parliament is also made in reference to the Petitions of the Polish Parents [Petition 0038/2006 submitted by Wojciech Pomorsk; Petition 712/2006 submitted by Lidia Jochimsen; Petition 713/2006 submitted by Beata Monika Pokrzeptowic-Meyer; Petition 848/2006 submitted by Miroslaw Kraszewski; Petition 849/2006 submitted by Brygida Pokrzeptowicz] as well as to the Petitions for the abolishment of the German Jugendamt [Petition submitted by the German Attorney Ingo Alberti and others].
Apart from the present move, the concern and content of this present document will also be correctly entered as a standalone petition at the European Parliament under Article 194 of the EC Treaty.
It may be the case that the information presented herein can be useful during the current discussions about the German Jugendamt complex of problems - but also for your upcoming meetings with German officials.

The dramatic misuse of state authority by the German Jugendamt

Within the framework of their respective competencies, the Council of Europe as well as the European Union are urgently asked to take immediate and clear public stances in which they should fairly condemn the inadmissible practices of the German Jugendamt (Youth Welfare Office) and social authorities that are clearly abusing their state authority against citizen rights and human rights. Within the scope of member states of the European Union and of the Council of Europe, non-German foreign parents of binational children living in Germany are as well affected as parents outside Germany in regard to cross-border conflicts about children's custody and access rights.

Over decades, the dramatic lack of quality control on the one hand accompanied by constant refusal of assuming responsibility with liablity in official duty by the functionary elites within the practice of German family law on the other hand have consequently lead to a well-established inhuman German state run child abuse machinery.

In many many cases, German Jugendamts have proven their real totalitarian faces by deliberately not correctly dealing with complaints. Such anti-democratic behaviour is a clear shame of a democratic society that is therefore having no justifed place at all neither within the European Union nor within the European Council.

It has been well observed and documented that the typical reaction to the public criticism against the wrongdoing and misbehaviour of German Jugendämter (Youth Welfare Offices) is that German Jugendämter are not only denying the facts but that German Jugendämter are puporsefully fighting the applicant and complainant even by deliberately more harming and damaging the involved human material, i.e. the primary victims, the involved children.

The range of victims of German state power covers the concerned victimized people within the activity fields of German Jugendamts. This means that there are innumerous justifed but deliberately not correctly answered and not remedied complaints about German Jugendämter. These are the complaints by parents and grandparents of divorce and separation; the complaints by children and adolescents placed in foster families and foster homes; the complaints by foster parents; the complaints by handicapped parents; the complaints about authority's failure to save abused and neglected children in fair time also resulting in handicaps and deaths; the complaints of non-German foreign parents and grandparents of binational children.

The experience and evaluation of the escalation dynamics between staff members of German Jugendämter (Youth Welfare Offices) and Jugendamt victims has shown that the state authority is misusing its power in so far that complainants have to face maltreatment, intimidation, coercion and threatening behaviour. Some of the German Youth Office aggressive instruments are that official demands of applicants and complainants are delayed, boycotted and denied; that the contact and access with the involved children is restricted or denied; that children are not given back after placement; that complainants are financially damaged on purpose; that complainants are exposed to psycho-emotional stress. For more reference see the following presented list of media covered case samples.

This list only shows an excerpt of media covered cases. Thus this list is not complete but quite sufficient for the time being to give an impression about the anti-human acting schemes of German Jugendämter (Youth Welfare Offices) all over the FRG. The overall impact of this listing also shows that there is something systematically wrong with the German system and its Jugendamt institution. The case samples covered by media reporting are only the tip of the human misery and of the German state run child abuse iceberg that is executed by German Jugendämter:

* Jugendamt Aachen: Deportation of a unaccompanied minor refugee
* Jugendamt Bad Hersfeld: placement of two children without informing the parents under false allegations of abuse
* Jugendamt Bamberg: Case of Aeneas; false allegations of negligence and abuse, placement in foster home
* Jugendamt Berlin: Case of Katharina; false allegations of sexual abuse
* Jugendamt Berlin: Corruption of staff member in placement arrangements of children
* Jugendamt Berlin-Marzahn: Putting neglected child at risk
* Jugendamt Berlin-Spandau: Suicide of a father in the Jugendamt
* Jugendamt Berlin-Tempelhof: Case of Süss; father's access rights, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Berlin-Treptow: Deportation of a unaccompanied minor refugee
* Jugendamt Blankenfelde: Hindering and delaying the administrative process for assisted living project of a Youth assistance association
* Jugendamt Bochum: Case of Justin; death of an abused infant
* Jugendamt Bonames: father's access rights with Baby
* Jugendamt Bonn: Custody battle with family with many children (14 children)
* Jugendamt Bremen: Case of Florian, Putting neglected child at risk
* Jugendamt Bremen: Case of Kevin, Putting abused and neglected child at risk resulting in the death of the toddler
* Jugendamt Burg: Case of Benjamin; death of a neglected child
* Jugendamt Cottbus: Case of Dennis; death of a neglected child
* Jugendamt Dresden: Case of Scarlett; putting neglected child at risk
* Jugendamt Duisburg: Case of Judith; false allegations of negligence and abuse, placement in foster families
* Jugendamt Duisburg: Case of Peter and Patricia; father's custody rights, placement in foster home
* Jugendamt Düsseldorf: Case of Alex; handicapped Mother fighting for custody
* Jugendamt Düsseldorf: Case of Nassos; father's access rights
* Jugendamt Erfurt: Case of Leon; death of neglected baby
* Jugendamt Erkrath: Case of Elsholz, father's access rights, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Erlangen: Case of Melissa, placement in mental institution
* Jugendamt Verden: Case of Lady Meyer; non-German foreign parent figthing for access and custody of binational children withheld in Germany
* Jugendamt Eschweiler: Sexual abuse by mother of the child
* Jugendamt Frankfurt/Oder: Case of Kevin and Tobias, death of two neglected toddlers
* Jugendamt Frankfurt/Oder: 14 year old neglected teenager
* Jugendamt Frankfurt/Main: putting two teenage girls (12 und 14) at risk of negligence and sexual abuse resulting in the suicide of the 12 year old girl
* Jugendamt Fürth: Putting three neglected children at risk (1, 3, 5 years)
* Jugendamt Gifhorn: Case of Anna-Maria; Handicapped Parents fighting for custody
* Jugendamt Göttingen: False allegations of sexual abuse against parents and hindering of the courts' collection of proof material
* Jugendamt Gütersloh: Case of Kraszewski; Non-German foreign parent figthing for access and custody of binational child withheld in Germany
* Jugendamt Hamburg: Case of Pomorski; Non-German foreign parent figthing for access and custody of binational child withheld in Germany
* Jugendamt Hamburg: Case of Jessica; death of a neglected child
* Jugendamt Hannover: Case of Krajc; Abuse with abuse (false allegations of sexual abuse), placement in foster home, placement in foster family
* Jugendamt Havelland: Case of Marc und Anke; Murder of 8 year old boy to cover the sexual abuse of his ten year old sister
* Jugendamt Hildesheim: Case of Nadine; death of an abused and neglected child
* Jugendamt Hildesheim: Deportation of a minor refugee boy (14 years) and placement of his two sisters 2 years and 14 months in foster families
* Kreisjugendamt Höxter: Case of Leon; death of an infant in a Vegan family
* Jugendamt Iserlohn: Grandparents fighting for access rights
* Jugendamt Kamp-Lintfort: Encouraging sexual abuse by deliberately ignoring the complaints of the abused and victimized children
* Jugendamt Kassel: Case of Marcel; death of an abused infant
* Jugendamt Koblenz: Return of an 11-year old boy against his will to Belgium
* Jugendamt Cologne: Case of Sandra; false allegations of sexual abuse, placement in foster homes
* Jugendamt Cologne: Case of Simon; Putting a neglected infant at risk
* Jugendamt Leipzig and Jugendamt Wittenberg: Case of Görgülü; father's access rights and custody, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights, Non-German foreign parent
* Jugendamt Lübeck: Case of Justin; Putting an abused child at risk
* Jugendamt Magdeburg: Putting three neglected children at risk
* Jugendamt Mülheim: Case of Hoffman; father's access rights, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Münster: Case of Haase; false allegations of negligence and abuse, family with many children, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Munich: Case of Kevin, putting a two year old toddler at the risk of physical abuse
* Jugendamt Oldenburg: Putting abused child at risk
* Jugendamt Osnabrück: Case of Kutzner; handicapped parents fighting for custody and access rights, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Peine: Case of Thorsten; Grandparents fighting for custody
* Jugendamt Potsdam: Case of Melanie; Putting an abused and neglected children at risk
* Jugendamt Regensburg: Case of Manuel und Mirjam; false allegations of negligence and abuse, placement in foster home and foster family
* Jugendamt Regensburg: Deaths of pemature twin infants
* Jugendamt Rostock: Case of Lea-Marie; Putting abused child at risk of physical harm until it becomes handicapped
* Jugendamt Rostock: Case of Sommerfeld; father's access rights, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Saarbrücken: Case of Pascal; placement in foster family, selling foster children for sexual abuse
* Jugendamt Saarlouis: Case of Meunier; Abuse with abuse (false allegations of sexual abuse), placement in foster family
* Jugendamt Sangershausen: Putting neglected child at risk and death of a seven weeks old infant
* Jugendamt Schweinsberg: Case of Aaron; Grandparents fighting for access rights and custody
Jugendamt Sieglar: Father of five children is threatening with self-immolation by burning
* Jugendamt Starnberg: Unlawful contract with foster parent, placement in foster family
* Jugendamt Strausberg: Case of Pascal; death of an abused toddler
* Jugendamt Stuttgart: Case of Jaqueline und Patrick; false allegations of negligence and abuse, family with many children
* Jugendamt Teltow-Fläming: Case of Leon, Rosario; Putting two neglected children at risk
* Jugendamt Traunstein: placement of three month old Baby after vaccination damage
* Jugendamt Troisdorf: Baby adoption and placement in foster family
* Jugendamt Tuttlingen: Case of Cooke; Non-German foreign parents figthing for access and custody of binational child withheld in Germany
* Jugendamt Waiblingen: Case of Alexander, Alois, Andreas; putting three children at risk under abuse and negligence in a foster family with death of a toddler
* Jugendamt Waldeck-Frankenberg: Death of infant due to lacking information
* Jugendamt Wiesbaden: Case of Sahin; father's access rights, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Wilhelmshaven: Case of Hickman; non-German foreign parent figthing for access and custody of binational children withheld in Germany
* Jugendamt Worms: Mass abuse with abuse in the cases of 25 adults and 16 children (false allegations of sexual abuse), placement in foster homes and families
* Jugendamt Wuppertal: Case of Hoppe; father's access rights and custody, Case before the ECHR- European Court of Human Rights
* Jugendamt Zwickau: Case of Mehmet; death of an abused toddler

I hope that you will clearly point your public fingers on these German state run child abuses and German Human Rights Violations.
I hope that you will not give in, and that you will not withdraw to an inadequate appeasement policy with the German government.
In the severe matter of extensive violation of citizen rights and human rights... for the upright mind there is no appeasement policy whatsoever possible with Germany. Never again.

Never!

The wrongdoing of the German government abusing the position of the presidency of the Council of the European Union in order to cover the German Jugendamt

There could have been and there can be taken into consideration possible historical action plans against the dramatic misuse of state authority by the German Jugendamt as a remedy established and effected by the Council of the European Union.

It is extremely most evident, that whenever the presidency of the Council of the European Union is held by the German government, the German government with its respective federal chancellors and federal foreign ministers is clearly avoiding to tackle the German Jugendamt complex of problems although at the same time there are a lot of international implications arousing by the wrongful German Jugendamt behaviour and acting. In this regard, I want to shed some explanatory light on the historical background of violations of international law and human rights by German family law practice and by the German Jugendamt.

WHY Mrs MERKEL? WHY Mr STEINMEIER? WHY ?
Why the Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel and the Federal Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier during the Presidency of the Council of the European Union 2007
have shown inactivity and disinterest so far
in the severe lack of effective quality control for the German Jugendamt (Jugendamt)?

I wish to complain against the German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel and the German Federal Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier in effecting the German Presidency of the Council of the European Union during the first half of the year 2007.

Before the background of the unacceptable acting of the German Jugendamt listed above, these are the urgent questions I would like to address to the German Presidency of the Council of the European Union and to the other members of the Council of the European Union:

>>> Why the Council of the European Union and respectively its German Presidency has not taken action so far to deal with the severe problem of the dramatic lack of quality control for the German Jugendamt (Youth Welfare Office) ?
>>> Why the Council of the European Union and respectively its German Presidency has not sought to raise awareness about the human rights standards that are abused and violated by German Jugendämter ?
>>> Why no public critcial discussion initiated by the Council of the European Union and respectively its German Presidency has been to hear, see and read about the desastrous situation of the German Jugendamt impact on citizen rights and human rights ?
>>> Why the Council of the European Union and respectively its German Presidency has avoided to achieve the goal of mainstreaming human rights-based approaches into political decision-making, especially by encouragíng the development of effective quality control for the German Jugendamt (Youth Welfare Office) ?
>>> The Presidency of the Council plays a vital part in the organization of the work of the institution of the Council of the European Union, notably as the driving force in the legislative and political decision-making process. It has to organize and chair all meetings and work out compromises capable of resolving difficulties. Why the German Presidency of the Council of the European Union as the main decision-making body of the European Union has repeatedly skipped the German Jugendamt problem from the agenda while preparing the groundwork for decision-making and co-ordination ?

WHY Mr SCHRÖDER? WHY Mr FISCHER? WHY ?
Why the Federal Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and the Federal Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer during the Presidency of the Council of the European Union 1999
have shown inactivity and disinterest
in the severe lack of effective quality control for the practice of German family law and the German Jugendamt (Jugendamt)?

The same questions to the German presidency of the Council of the European Union during the period of the first half-year 2007 do also apply for the period of the first half-year 1999. Therefore I also wish to complain against the German Federal Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and the German Federal Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer in effecting the German Presidency of the Council of the European Union during the first half of the year 1999. The German Presidency in 1999 is very well quite aware about the German family law and Jugendamt complex of problems. Nevertheless, the German Presidency in 1999 is clearly avoiding to tackle the German Jugendamt complex of problems although at the same time there are a lot of international implications arousing by the wrongful German Jugendamt behaviour and acting.

The historical violations of international law and human rights by German family law practice and by the German Jugendamt are everything else than an ephemera's short-term celebrity of no lasting significance.
The historical violations of international law and human rights by German family law practice and by the German Jugendamt are everything else than a normal system's scrap of only some deplorable individual cases that could occur within the range of a certain process tolerance.
The facts of the present subject matter of continous, systematic and structural German human rights abuse and violations is also proven by the following excerpts of international and German media coverage (1997-2002):

24.03.1996 - In the Name of the Fatherland - Sunday Telegraph
28.06.1996 - Bei den Kindern hört Europa auf - Die Zeit

13.01.1997 - Nicht ohne meine Kinder - Focus
27.01.1997 - Besuchsrecht der Großeltern - Focus

01.04.1998 - L'imbroglio des divorces franco-allemands - Libération
30.11.1998 - Erst Liebe, dann Faustrecht - Süddeutsche Zeitung

10.04.1999 - Auch Staaten streiten um Scheidungskinder - Die Welt
14.06.1999 - State Abandons Kidnapped Kids - Insight Magazine
02.08.1999 - In Child Custody, Germany Is Tough on the French - The New York Times
03.09.1999 - Scheidung - Kleinkind landete im Gefängnis - Die Welt
03.09.1999 - A quatre ans en garde à vue - Le Figaro
21.10.1999 - Im Zweifel für den Kidnapper - Süddeutsche Zeitung
29.11.1999 - Justice Ignores Stolen Kids - Insight Magazine
23.12.1999 - Xavier passera Noël sans ses filles - Le Parisien
12.1999- Wenn Mama zur Feindin wird, Emotionaler Mißbrauch bei Scheidungskindern, Die Zeit

29.01.2000 - Elián ist überall - Die Welt
10.02.2000 - Thousands of Kids Abducted to Foreign Lands - APB News
10.03.2000 - State's New Smoke Screen - Insight Magazine
24.03.2000 - Abduction Cases Draw Ire on Hill - Washington Post
26.03.2000 - Germans face US campaign over child custody rights - Sunday Telegraph
29.03.2000 - About 1,000 Children Abducted From U.S. Each Year - APB News

01.07.2000 - La Guerra por la Paternidad - El Mercurio
06.07.2000 - Céline, 4 ans, kidnappée par sa mère allemande - Le Républicain Lorrain
06.07.2000 - German Injustice - Washington Post
08.07.2000 - At war over stolen kids - Chicago Tribune
08.07.2000 - Le Rhin sépare toujours les familles - Le Figaro
09.07.2000 - Germans don't budge even after plea by Clinton - Chicago Tribune
27.07.2000 - U.S. Welcomes German Response to Custody Case - Reuters
27.07.2000 - U.S. Father To See Kids in Germany - Associated Press
27.07.2000 - Germany Aids U.S. Father - Washington Post
27.07.2000 - Bei Scheidungen ist der Rhein oft noch immer unüberwindbar - Agence France Presse
27.07.2000 - Le problème des couples mixtes - TF1 / Informations
28.07.2000 - Grenzfälle des Sorgerechts - Hamburger Abendblatt
28.07.2000 - Deutschland arrangiert Besuch für US-Vater - Berliner Zeitung
28.07.2000 - Deutschland und USA kooperieren bei Sorgerechtskonflikten - Süddeutsche Zeitung
28.07.2000 - Americans Fight Foreign Parental Abductions - APB News
30.07.2000 - Two Parents, Two Countries - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
01.08.2000 - Vom Recht auf beide Eltern - Süddeutsche Zeitung
01.08.2000 - Besuchsrecht ist Menschenrecht - Die Welt
12.09.2000 - Study Probes Spouse Abducted Kids - Associated Press
13.09.2000 - Feds: Foreign Courts Soft on Parental Abductions - APB News
15.09.2000 - Parents déchirés, enfants volés - Reader's Digest
02.10.2000 - Lady Meyer Struggles for Parental Rights - Insight Magazine
24.12.2000 - Indifference Adds To Parents' Horror - Washington Post

08.06.2001 - Give Back the Children - Washington Post
13.06.2001 - Abducted Children Still Beyond Reach - Washington Post
01.07.2001 - Complicity in Child Abduction - Insight Magazine
03.07.2001 - Protecting America's children - Washington Times
23.07.2001 - Interview with Pierre Cardo (Member of French parliament, Member of French-German mediation group with the Task Force for settlement of international conflicts in child affa irs at the German Federal Ministry of Justice, Member of ICMEC) - Radio BFM
09.07.2001 - Détention confirmée du secrétaire général de "SOS Enlèvement d'enfants" - Agence France Presse
13.06.2001 - Children Still Beyond Reach, Germany Falls Short in Custody Disputes - Washington Post
10.08.2001 - Wenn die Beziehung am Ende ist Immer häufiger führen binationale Ehen zu Sorgerechtskonflikten / Eine Kommission versucht zu vermitteln - Frankfurter Rundschau
21.08.2001 - Imbroglio juridique - Dernieres Nouvelles d'Alsace
21.08.2001 - France -Allemagne : La guerre des enfants - Le meilleur
08.10.2001 - Familienrecht : Die Ohnmacht der Väter. Männer machen mobil - noch können Ex-Frauen ihnen nach der Trennung ihre Kinder ungestraft vorenthalten - Focus
11.10.2001 23:7 - Vermischtes : Kinder-Besuchsverbot für Ledige war nicht rechtens - Frankfurter Rundschau
11.10.2001, 18:44h, aktualisiert 19:05h - Archiv/panorama : Die Rechte unehelicher Väter gestärkt; Der Europäische Menschenrechts-Gerichtshof hilft Vätern, die ihre Kinder nicht mehr sehen durften - Kölner Stadtanzeiger
12.10.2001 - Gerichtshof stärkt Väter; Europäischer Rüffel an deutsche Gerichte - Die tageszeitung
06.11.2001 - Vie privée, Vie publique, A qui appartiennt les enfants ? - TV France 3 20:50
17.01.2001 - Deutsch-amerikanische Rosenkriege: Wo bleiben die Kinder? - Bayerisches Fernsehen, Zeitspiegel 21:20
09.07.2001 - Sorgerechtsstreit - Eltern treten in Hungerstreik - Berliner Zeitung
11.07.2001 - TF1 (France) > TV news
11.07.2001 - Divorces binationaux: des parents commencent une grève de la faim à Berlin - Agence France Presse
11.07.2001 - Eltern hungern für Kontakt mit Kindern - Berliner Morgenpost
11.07.2001 - Un père divorcé français écroué à Berlin - Le Figaro
11.07.2001 - Sorgerechtsstreit: Väter und Großmutter im Hungerstreik - Deutsche Presse-Agentur
11.07.2001 - Les parents d'enfants enlevés par l'Allemagne" manifestent à Berlin - La Liberté
12.07.2001 -discussion with Rolf S toeckel (SPD) Member of German Parliament and member of the Task Force for settlement of Intenrational Conflicts in Ch ild Affairs at the Federal Ministry of Justice - Radio France International (FM 106), 12:30 + 18:00
12.07.2001 - Hungerstreik auf dem Gendarmenmarkt - Berliner Zeitung
12.07.2001 - Vater darf sein Kind nicht sehen - Tagesspiegel + Potsdamer Neueste Nachrichten
13.07.2001 - Les papas divorcés en grève de la faim - France-Soir (French)
13.07.2001 - Protestations de parents divorcés contre la justice allemande - Le Monde
13.07.2001 - In 783 Tagen einmal - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
13.07.2001 - Radio presentation "Parents in Hungerstrike" / Radioauftritt "Eltern im Hungerstreik" - SFB, Multi-Kulti
(FM 106.8) 12:00 + 14:00
14.07.2001 - Divorces binationaux: manifestation et grève de la faim à Berlin - Agence France Presse
14.07.2001 - Solidaritätskundgebung für hungerstreikende "verlassene" Eltern - Deutscher Depeschen Dienst
15.07.2001 - Väter ohne Kinder - Berliner Kurier
16.07.2001 - Es geht darum, nicht aufzugeben; Hans-Helmut Meyer protestierte mit anderen Vätern in Berlin für Besuchsrecht - Peiner Nachrichten
17.07.2001 - Seit 369 Tagen keinen Kontakt mehr - Berliner Morgenpost 17.07.2001 - Hunger Strikers Protest German Child Custody Rules - Associated Press
26.07.2001 - Radio interview with Olivier Karrer and Bernd Michael Uhl / Radio-Interview mit Olivier Karrer und Bernd Michael Uhl - SWR 1, Aktuell, 12:05-13:00 + 17:05-18:00
26.07.2001 - television report about the hungerstrike, Fernsehbericht über den Hungerstreik - ARD, Brisant, 17.00
27.07.2001 - Radio interview with Matthias Bloch and Michal Hickman / Radio-Interview mit Matthias Bloch und
Michal Hickman - BBC WORLD News, 17:00
03.08.2001 - Hungern für das Umgangsrecht - Berliner Zeitung
04.08.2001 - Denied parents driven to fasting, Hunger strike challenges German courts' custody practice - The Guardian
06.08.2001 - Sehnsucht nach Samuel, Väter und Mütter, die ihre von Partnern entführten Kinder oft jahrelang nicht
sehen konnten, protestieren gegen deutsche Ämter und Gerichte; Deutschland, Familie, Nr. 32 - Der Spiegel
16.08.2001 - Väterdemo für Umgangsrechte-Anwalt betont vor Gericht die Menschenrechtsdimension - Wilhemshavener Zeitung
20.08.2001 - Willkür der Behörden, Partner aus binationalen Ehen kämpfen um ihre entführten Kinder; Briefe, Nr. 34 - Der Spiegel
21.08.2001 - Le Rhin separe toujours les familles - Dernieres Nouvelles d'Alsace
21.08.2001 - Un père privé de ses deux fils, A 43 ans, Maurice Elfeke lutte pour récupérer ses enfants, enlévés en 1998
par leur mère allemande. Après un sejour en prison et une grève de la faim, ce consultant d'entreprise n'a toujours
pas obentu gain de cause - Le meilleur
29.08.2001 - Umgangsrecht : Protest geht weiter; dem aus Südafrika angereisten Vater wurde Umgangsrecht verwehrt -
Wilhemshavener Zeitung
31.08.2001 - Mutter kritisiert die Aktionen des Vaters; Nicole Hickman : "Kinder lehnen Umgang ab" - Wilhemshavener
Zeitung
31.08.2001 - Auch Mütter sind unter den Betroffenen - Wilhemshavener Zeitung
29.09.2001 - Protest vor dem Jugendamt - Wilhemshavener Zeitung
02.10.2001 - Vermittlung gefordert; Aktionskreis Internationale Kinderrechte - Wilhemshavener Zeitung

10.01.2002 - Divorces franco-allemands: l'Allemagne accusée de "blocages"- Agence France Presse
12.01.2002 - Enfants divorcés franco-allemands dans l'impasse; La commission parlemantaire chargée d'harmoniser la législation entre les deux pays est au point mort - France Soir
17.01.2002 - Männer - das diskriminierte Geschlecht? - Familienzeit, Bayrischer Rundfunk
24.01.2002 - Eine Mutter entführt ihr eigenes Kind - der Vater begeht Selbstmord, Jahrelang ist der Fall zwischen
Stuttgarter Gerichten hin und her geschoben worden, nun gibt ein Sprecher zu: Das muss uns eine Lehre sein,
Stuttgarter Zeitung
31.01.2002 - Does Germany Condone Kidnapping ? - Washington Post
31.01.2002 - Väter drohen mit Milliardenklage - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
15.02.2002 - Kinder im Niemandsland - Süddeutsche Zeitung
15.02.2002 - EU-Regeln für Scheidungskinder rücken näher - Nordwest.net
16.02.2002 - Wie Baron Instetten die kleine Annie abrichtete; Nur gedankenlose oder grausame Eltern wetteifern um die
Zeit ihres Kindes - Neue Studien zum Entfremdungssyndrom - Süddeutsche Zeitung
20.02.2002 - Mutter aus Plauen kämpft gegen Urteil : "Ich gebe meine Tochter nicht her" - Frankenpost
22.02.2002 - Plauen: Fall Melanie zeiht weite Kreise; Vater: "Zum Kindeswohl gehört Pflege der Beziehung zu beiden
Elternteilen" - Frankenpost
25.02.2002 - "Dein Vater ist unser Feind"; Wie der heute 23-jährige Markus Molnár die Scheidung seiner Eltern erlebt
hat - Der Spiegel 9/2002, Beute Kind
25.02.2002 - Ein Krieg, den alle verlieren; Im Scheidungsdrama werden Kinder zu Opfern: Aus Rache und Hass
verwehren vor allem Mütter ihren Ex-Partnern jeden Kontakt mit ihnen. In neuen Studien belegen Psychologen die
fatalen Folgen des "Entfremdungssyndroms", Juristen wollen jetzt die Rechte der Väter stärken. - Der Spiegel
9/2002, Beute Kind
11.03.2002 - Kinder brauchen beide Eltern - Der Spiegel 11/2002, Leserbriefe
18.03.2002 - And no one lived happily ever after - Of the many children abducted every year, more than 40 per cent are taken by a parent. As Clare Dwyer Hogg reports, it's a situation that Catherine Meyer experienced first-hand - The Independent
02.04.2002 - Man ist den Richtern ausgeliefert - Münchener Abendzeitung
02.05.2002 - Rechtsbeugung und Skandalurteile, Wie blind ist unsere Justiz ? Über 20.000 Richter und Staatsanwälte bilden bei uns die sogenannte dritte Gewalt im Staat, die nach den Gesetzen für Recht sorgen soll. Aber immer öfter wird einigen von Ihnen Inkompetenz oder Missbrauch vorgeworfen - Praline 19/02
03.05.2002 - Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen - Frankfurter Rundschau
04.05.2002 - France-Allemagne, Une quarantaine de demandes en instance Timides espoirs pour les enfants de divorcés - Le Figaro
15.05.2002 - Divorces franco-allemands, rien n'est réglé - 20 minutes
30.05.2002 - Zu-Dumm-Eltern Warum gibt ihnen die Regierung ihre Kinder nicht mehr zurück? Dies ist die Geschichte von verzweifelten Eltern, von Trauer, Tränen und schlimmster Behördenwillkür -Bild
02.06.27 - Ämter nahmen ihnen vor 5 Jahren die Kinder weg Sind diese Eltern zu dumm für ihre zwei Kinder? -Bild
06.06.2002 - Die herzlosen Vier - Sie nahmen Eltern die sieben Kinder. wer die Verantwortlichen sind. Die Ausflüchte der Politiker - Neue Revue, Heft 24
31.05.2002 - Vier Millionen Kinder haben keinen Kontakt zu Vater oder Mutter - Associated Press
01.06.2002 - Väter hungern für ihre Kinder - Die Tageszeitung (TAZ)
04.06.2002 - Aufbruch der Väter - Hamburger Morgenpost
08.06.2002 - Väter demonstrieren für ihr Recht auf Kinder - Rheinische Post
11.06.2002 - Väter ohne Rechte; Zwei Millionen Väter werden nach der Trennung von ihren Partnerinnen daran gehindert, ihre Kinder zu sehen, so eine Schätzung des Vereins "Väteraufbruch für Kinder". Deutsche Gerichte, so der Vorwurf, würden häufig zu Gunsten von Müttern entscheiden, die durch die Wegnahme der Kinder die Männer vor vollendete Tatsachen stellen. Mittlerweile hat der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte mehreren Vätern Recht gegeben, die vor deutschen Gerichten in ihrem Kampf um das Umgangsrecht in allen Instanzen gescheitert waren - bis hin zum Bundesverfassungsgericht. - Frontal 21, ZDF
13.06.2002 - Brücken für Kinder - Schwarzwälder Bote
16.06.2002 - Die verstoßenen Väter - Sie leiden jeden Tag, weil sie ihre Kinder nicht sehen dürfen - Bild am Sonntag
06.2002 - Sorgerecht, Darf man einem Kind den Vater nehmen ? Matthieu Carrière kämpft um seine Tochter, Jetzt tritt
er in den Hungerstreik - Die Aktuelle
16.02.2002 - Französischer Vater kämpft um seine Söhne, Maurice Elfeke wurde in Berlin verhaftet, als er das deutsche
Justizministerium um Hilfe bitten wollte - Berliner Morgenpost
17.06.2002 - Väter hungern für ihre Kinder, Nach einer Scheidung wird fast immer den Müttern das Sorgerecht zugesprochen. Manche mißbrauchen dieses Recht und verbieten den Vätern aus Rachegelüsten jeglichen Kontakt und ihren Kindern. Jetzt gehen betroffene Väter auf die Barrikaden und treten in den Hungerstreik - Polylux, 00.50, 4.45, ARD
26.06.2002 - Manifestation devant le palais des droits de l'Homme; Le désarroi des pères divorcés allemands, Des pères et des grands-parents allemands, séparés de leurs enfants et petits-enfants, ont dénoncé hier le non-respect de leur droit de visite devant le palais des droits de l'Homme- Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace
27.06.2002 - Letzte Hoffnung Kanzler Schroeder; Cornelia Haase (34), eine liebe Mutter. Behörden nahmen ihr die
sieben Kinder, grundlos. Sie kämpft verzweifelt. Wer, wenn nicht der Kanzler, kann sie retten.- Neue Revue, Heft 27
01.07.2002 - Kein Einzelfall: Mutter verweigert Besuchsrecht "Ich darf meine Tochter nicht mehr sehen!", Aufreger der
Woche - Bild der Frau
06.07.2002 - Das unangreifbare Grundrecht auf Mutter und Vater; Eltern kämpfen nach der Trennung einen hoffnungsvollen und chancenlosen Kampf um ihre Kinder - Neues Deutschland
10.07.2002 - Immer mehr Trennungskinder - Frankfurter Rundschau Online
12.07.2002 - Streit um Kinder: Ehepaar gewinnt in Straßburg gegen deutsche Justiz - Deutsche Presse-Agentur,
Prozesse/Soziales/Kinder
15.07.2002 - Väter wollen nach der Trennung nicht nur "Zahlmeister" sein - Donaukurier
20.07.2002 - Behinderte Frau widerruft Vorwürfe gegen Ehemann; Nach ihrer ersten Aussage hatte er sie gequält und mißhandelt; Falschaussage wird verfolgt; Für eine Überraschung von Richter und Staatsanwalt sorgte die Hauptbelastungszeugin, als sie erklärte: "Die Beschuldigungen meines Mannes waren alle erfunden - ich widerrufe alle früheren Aussagen gegen ihn." Sie habe sich von ihren Bekannten überreden lassen, gegen ihren Mann Anzeige wegen Körperverletzung zu erstatten, um beim Scheidungsverfahren das Sorgerecht für ihr Kind zu bekommen. - Passauer Neue Nachrichten
20.07.2002 - Justitia mit Augenklappe; Väteraufbruch demonstriert vor dem Freiburger Amtsgericht; "Kein guter Umgang, Herr Richter!" - unter diesem Motto hat die Ortsgruppe Freiburg des "Väteraufbruchs für Kinder" gestern vor dem Amtsgericht demonstriert. Mit teils drastischen Installationen wiesen die Männer auf ihre Benachteiligung hin: Nach der Trennung dürften sie ihre Kinder seltener sehen als die Mütter. - Badische Zeitung vom Samstag
07.2002 - EGMR: Ehepaar gewinnt in Straßburg gegen deutsche Justiz Ein niedersächsisches Ehepaar hat in einem Sorgerechtsstreit um seine beiden Töchter einen Sieg vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte in Straßburg gegen die deutsche Justiz errungen - Neue juristische Wochenzeitschrift 31/2002 - Die neuen Prügelknaben; Nicht Mädchen, sondern Jungen werden in Schule und Elternhaus benachteiligt. Doch die Erkenntnis setzt sich bei Pädagogen nur zögernd durch - Die Zeit, Gesellschaft
01.08.2002 - Fast so viele Scheidungen wie neue Ehen; Umgangsrecht immer häufiger strittig - Ostsseezeitung
01.08.2002 - Väter marschieren für die Kinder; Protestmarsch in die Bundeshauptstadt vom 3. August bis 8. September - Oberpfalznetz
03.08.2002 - Matthieu Carrière : Er kämpft um seine Tochter; Weil Kinder dem Ex-Partner oft vorenthalten werden : Schauspieler trat in den Hungerstreik; Protestmarsch des Vereins "Trennungsväter" - Münchener Abendzeitung

Possible historical action plans against the dramatic misuse of state authority by the German Jugendamt

I think that the Council of the European Union is doing wrong with its inactivity and disinterest in the misery of the state run child abuse that is executed by the German Jugendämter (Youth Welfare Offices) whenever the Council of the European Union meets German officials from the German government or from the German federal parliament (Bundestag) or even from the National Ombudsmen, i.e. Der Petitionsausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages or other Committees of the Bundestag such as the Committee on the Affairs of the European Union; the Committee on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid; the Committee on Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth.

The Council of the European Union should officially address also via media presence the problem of the dramatic lack of quality control of the German Jugendamt (Jugendamt). The Council of the European Union should demand from the respective archives of the German government and from the German federal parliament (Bundestag) and even from the National Ombudsmen, i.e. Der Petitionsausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages, copies of the complaints about German Jugendamts (Jugendämter) that are lodged by the victimized citizens. The Council of the European Union should in regard to a fair comparision of the view of the German government and parliament on the one hand and the victimized, aggressed and exploited citizens on the other hand open an avenue for citizens and NGOs to address the Council of the European Union directly with their complaints about German Jugendamts (Jugendämter).

The Council of the European Union should clearly stress that the German government and legislative will have to intensify their efforts in implementing an effective quality control for the German Jugendamt (Jugendamt). The Council of the European Union should adress the problems of the dramatic lack of an effective quality control for the German Jugendamt (Jugendamt) within its publications. The Council of the European Union should in an appeal to the member states of the European Union name the German Jugendamt problem that also causes many cross-border problems and that is negatively affecting the Human Rights Standards within the European Union.

The Council of the European Union could also thereby clearly enhancing its visibility by showing no fear at all even to confront the biggest economic, historically and strategially important member states such as Germany in European democratic processes.

Please, treat my complaint publicy.

In reference to the Answer FILE NUMBER 00014551 of the European Ombudsman from 04.04.2007, I wish to complain on the recommendation of the European Ombudsman against the European Union Body of the "Council of the European Union explicitly under German presidencies" due to its inactivity and disinterest so far in the severe lack of effective quality control for the German Jugendamt (Youth Welfare Office).

The German Jugendamt in the existing form and with the existing competencies as shown and proven above is an anti-democratic institution financed by the citizens and without any effective quality control for the citizens. The need that the German Jugendamt should already have appeared on the agenda of the European Union Body of the Council of the European Union not only but certainely especially during the respective German presidencies of the Council of the European Union is evident. The Council of the European Union should already have become active either to improve the quality control for the German Jugendamt or to completely abolish the German Jugendamt within the European Union for a very long time. The Council of the European Union still can become active in the matter of the German Jugendamt right now.

_________________________

Kassel, Germany, 13.04.2007

Yours sincerely,
Bernd Michael Uhl
www.systemkritik.de
Human Rights Activist and System Critic