The Registrar, European Court of Human Rights

Council of Europe
F-67075 STRASBOURG CEDEX
FRANCE
Dossier 31061/17 (56472/17)

I, the undersigned refugee and human rights defender, with first name Tudor-Andrei, last name
Raneti, mother’s name Mariana, father’s name Viorel, legally domiciled in Romania, Bucharest, sector 3,
Theodor Pallady boulevard, no 2, M2A apartment block, entrance B, 6th floor, 61th apartment, where I
don’t live since 2009 – so don’t use it as address of correspondence, identified with Identity Card series
RT no 654712 emitted by SPCEP S3 bureau no 4 on 4th September 2009 and having personal numeric
code 1801010394508, with the chosen address of electronic correspondence: tudor.raneti@gmail.com,

formulate the following

Answer to ECHR’s address from 18th September 2018

-2.1 regarding ECHR’s illegal mandatory representation request accompanied with a threat of
denial of justice, given Rule 34 paragraph 2 recommends not makes representation mandatory, as is not
juridically possible because the right to represent oneself is fundamental, nor is it possible for ECHR to
decide on behalf of the plaintiff that he retracts or not his petition evidently because ECHR is not and
can not be mandated by the plaintiff to exercise his will on his behalf, and
-2.2 regarding the illegal petition object change infringing again on the fundamental juridical
principle of each party’s faculty to exercise its own will and set the juridical context of its petition, all the
more ECHR flagrantly breaks its own regulations declaring Rule 39 is not about the right to life, liberty,
freedom from torture and other implicit fundamental rights, and
-2.3 regarding the 3 incoherent questions posed, both juridically and factually alienated from
the reality of the case which the criminal ECHR “judge” attempts uselessly to denature to hide the
Romanian Crimes against humanity and ECHR’s direct implication in 6 distinct acts of cover-up

-1.1 Beforeword. My first Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures I introduced on
18 April 2017, not 21st July 2017 which is merely the 1st update. The latest update or the 5th Rule 39
th

ECHR urgent request for interim measures in which I’ve specifically mentioned it makes all other 4
before it obsolete, I’ve lodged with ECHR in August 2018, as published at address:
https://www.scribd.com/document/352597506/Raneti-vs-Romania-at-ECHR
-1.2 which is tied to my ICC penal complaint for Romanian Crimes against humanity, published
at address:
https://www.scribd.com/document/383381894/Raneti-vs-Romania-at-ICC-for-Crimes-Against-Humanity
-1.3. 31061/17 and 56472/17 are one and the same Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures as I’ve specifically mentioned in the 5th Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures,
and referred to it as 31061/17 because it’s an update of 31061/17 not 56472/17, which is ECHR’s
Page 1 of 8
imbecile attempt to create confusion by referring to the 2nd it already destroyed, giving it another
number to make it appear as the first evidently to cover up it’s complicity to the 7th Crimes against
humanity committal between 27th May 2017 and 8th June 2017 which could’ve prevented but purposely
did not by destroying the 1st Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures. ECHR’s criminals after
receiving the 5th Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures and remarking the full
demonstration of Romanian Crimes against humanity and ECHR’s cover-up, attempt now to sweep their
crimes under the rug or cover-up their crimes with the address from 18th September 2018 annexed to
this answer. Anyone observing must refer to the document I’ve published at the first link above, which is
the correct Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures
-1.4 In conclusion, this also constitutes another proof of ECHR’s corruption and refusal to
respect the law, its own regulations, administer the proofs and established facts of the case. I will refer
to the 5th Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures regardless

0. About the impossibility of representation, and ECHR’s “judge’s” lie that is mandatory,
accompanied with a threat of denial of justice and cover-up of Romanian Crimes against humanity as
if ECHR could do anything than illegally deny justice as usual. Rule 34 paragraph 2 states “the applicant
should be represented” not “must” as the “judge” lies in the address I received from ECHR, and since I
am better than any law practitioner I’ve ever heard of, “should” in my case is a “shouldn’t” because of
the plethora of spineless “lawyers” I’ve uncovered in the process of demonstrating the whole Romanian
magistrate body is in actuality just another Romanian “state” mafia arm - not independent in the least
but 100% corrupt and at least 86% statistically proven criminal, meaning willing to instigate to Crimes
against humanity by falsifying judicial decisions, trafficking influence etc. Regardless and as proof, I
contacted by email the biggest lawyer firms according to their income on wikipedia.com, or the most
relevant, from the world, Europe, UK and Romania, as well as the hundreds of ELENA pro bono lawyers,
offering fee covering with litigation funding through Nivalion, or judicial aid, and almost all refused to
represent me tacitly, even if for completing the form and redirecting all correspondence to me, being
afraid to get involved in this ultimate level litigation against the international mafia I discovered and
denounced, about which they are either aware or made aware by my case, or answered unjustified that
they cannot represent me which is not because they aren’t lawyers or truth and justice advocates but
because they are afraid or the opposite, obviously, therefore since I’m otherwise able to represent
myself better than any law practitioner I’ve ever heard of, without formal studies, clearly I shouldn’t be
represented especially by this entire profession of charlatans. Also, because every magistrate in
Romania is a criminal, it’s implied every lawyer in Romania to “practice” must obey the mafia’s orders or
be persecuted, which is proven both by the tens of Romanian lawyers who were put by the mafia to
represent me by “pleading” against my rights, and their unjustified refusal to represent me, or do their
job when I hire them which is the third proof I got, or the actual notorious persecution of other lawyers
from Romania who tried to do their job. As I’ve already proven, the Romanian “lawyers” are all mafia
associates, or afraid and implicitly corrupted. This situation represents an unanimous tacit admittance of
the existence of the international criminal activity I’ve uncovered, from the most relevant representants
of the entire lawyer profession

Page 2 of 8
 0.1 About the fundamental right to represent myself. Lack of representation cannot infringe on
the right to represent myself, nor can it constitute justified grounds for denial of justice as there can be
none, according to the fundamental principle of every person having the faculty to manifest its own will
and therefore set the juridical context of its petitions, principle on which ECHR already infringed upon by
lying since 2017 that Rule 39 urgent requests for interim measures are not about the Article 2 - the right
to life, implicitly physical and psychological integrity, when I was already an internally displaced person
between 11th April 2017 and 27th May 2017 when the 7th Crimes against humanity were committed
against me as I’ve proven in section I.A.II.1.3.1^7 of my ICC penal complaint, then a permanent refugee
from 1st September 2017 when I was tipped off of the ongoing 8th Crimes against humanity attempt
against me as described in annex 21 paragraph 2.4^45 from my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures, ECHR furthering this lie in 2018 in its address that I’ve annexed to this answer, by
downplaying the Romanian Crimes against humanity by lying Rule 39 ECHR urgent requests for interim
measures are not about the right to life but about the right to private life.
0.1.1 About the falsification of the object of my petition. The object of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent
request for interim measures as the ECHR “judge” lies is not the illegal incarceration or the “psychiatric”
charlatanry examination that never took place being impossible without my consent and cooperation;
the object is that I’m a refugee fleeing from the Romanian “state” mafia under proven threat of
indefinite incarceration, Torture, Bodily Harm and Qualified Murder as demonstrated in annex 21 of my
last Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures, as I’ve demonstrated the Romanian “state”
mafia perpetrated 2 Crimes against humanity committals and 6 Crimes against humanity attempts
against me in my ICC penal complaint as proven in sections I.A.II.1.3.1^1-8 of my ICC penal complaint,
indicated where I’ve published it on the internet, as full demonstration of every annex of my Rule 39
ECHR urgent request for interim measures - reminding that the two Crimes against humanity
committals consist in covertly then openly being chemically lobotomized with deadly fluorine and
chlorine neurotoxins and put in anaphylactic shock and left to die, then chemically lobotomized again
after I survived, then the mafia issued the final solution for my indefinite incarceration Torture, Bodily
Harm and Qualified Murder, which constitutes the 8th ongoing Crimes against humanity I’m a
permanent refugee because of since 1st September 2017. Only I the claimant have the right to establish
the juridical context of my claim, which can only be ex officio in public interest expanded upon by the
authorities, but not restricted. The obvious evidence I couldn’t have been legally incarcerated, is that I’m
innocent since I was never indicted and convicted being thus legally, not just factually innocent, as
proven by annex 17, annex 18 and annex 19 of my last Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures representing the Romanian “state” mafia’s own admission I have no judicial history, and the
fact no special “psychiatric” charlatanry indictment exists according to article 331 from the Romanian
Penal Procedure Code as proof there wasn’t even a falsified trial in which I would’ve been falsely
convicted, nor was there even one proof administered by the mafia “prosecutor” caporegimes, not even
falsified proofs for the mafia’s schizophrenic or incoherent accusations as I’ve demonstrated in all
annexed summaries of my Rule 39 ECHR request, and at large in my ICC penal complaint. My case is by
the book state terrorism and wrongful political repression for the cover up of Crimes against humanity,
and cannot be compared with existing jurisprudence since my case is Rule 39 not just personal, as I’m
going as a human rights defender against the “psychiatry” charlatanry and the Romanian “state” mafia
Page 3 of 8
as a whole, since I’ve proven both entities are criminal, meaning my petition is not only about the
conviction of the actual public functionaries constituting the Romanian “state” mafia, but aiming for the
result of retracting the accreditation of the “psychiatry” charlatanry as a legitimate profession and
condemning its charlatans, as well as their accomplices from the pharmaceutical mafia and auditing
state agencies. Furthermore there is no such thing as “psychiatric hospitals” as I’ve proven that
“psychiatry” is charlatanry, neither medicine nor science, and commits Crimes against humanity in
Romanian in actual gulags against the general population, as I demonstrated in section I.A.II.1.2.1 of my
ICC penal complaint
0.2.a About the ECHR’s criminal agenda. This apparent criminal ECHR petty attempt to cover up
Romanian Crimes against humanity makes no logical sense whatsoever because being a permanent
refugee I can perpetually legally lodge any number of petitions with ECHR, since the situation continues
to exist after the so called definitive ECHR decisions which can only have at best retroactive effect, being
thus redundant especially when updating my petition with ECHR’s crimes against which ECHR cannot
issue a decision according to the principle nemo esse iudex in sua causa potest. Furthermore the ECHR
“decision” is risible because it lacks the universal law premise, the particular factual premise, and the
objectivized inference meaning the motivation of demonstration of the decision, in other words in lacks
the entire judicial syllogism which is in itself definite proof the decision is falsified, and proves again
ECHR is corrupt and criminal. In short the ECHR “judge” broke Article 45 paragraph 1 “Reasons shall be
given for judgments as well as for decisions declaring applications admissible or inadmissible”. The logic
of ECHR’s latest criminal decision is in tune with the last 6 destructions of my petition for the purpose of
cover up of Romanian Crimes against humanity. The generic, unmotivated or unobjectivized invocation
of Articles 24 paragraph 2, 35 and 36 does not constitute “Reasons shall be given”, all the more the
ECHR “judge” broke Article 35 because it states I have the right to personally petition ECHR, therefore
the ECHR “judge“ is clearly schizophrenic meaning logically incoherent and occupationally dysfunctional,
and, the ECHR “judge” broke Article 36 because it states I have the right to address ECHR only after
exhausting domestic remedies which I did and proven in my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures, which is irrelevant because Rule 39 petitions are not subject to Rule 36 conditions according
to Rule 47 paragraph 5.1 letter b, in conclusion, the ECHR’s decision is proven falsified because it
breaks the law namely Articles 35 and 36 invoked without correlation to a particular factual premise.
P.S. “Reasons shall be given for judgment” is pleonastic - there is no such thing as a judgment without
reasoning. Furthermore in law practice opinions have no value in the juridical syllogism therefore Article
45 paragraph 2 is wrong, and any public functionary who does not denounce corruption is an
accomplice, and is obligated by law to denounce felonies or the law being broken. The ECHR regulations
look written by illiterate mafia peasants, which is of no surprise
0.2.b About the ECHR’s criminal agenda. Also, this otherwise apparent ECHR attempt to make
peace between the goat and the cabbage that I’ve seen Romanian mafia “magistrates” caporegimes try
before won’t work, nor do I regard it as ECHR’s intent because of 0.2.a argument. The Romanian “state”
mafia packed full with criminal psychopaths won’t obviously condemn itself nor be willing to pay for its
Crimes against humanity which I aim for; therefore there is no amiable solution unless the Romanian
“state” mafia pays 24.2 billion dollars in damages plus the monthly amount for actively destroying my
informatics and law careers, as I’ve outlaid in annex 23 section IV of my last Rule 39 ECHR urgent
Page 4 of 8
request for interim measures. My flesh, blood and liberty weren’t for sale nor are they even for 24.2
billion dollars, so the sum is not only justified by the jurisprudence of J&J notorious convictions in the
USA as I’ve demonstrated in annex 21 paragraph 1.9 of my last Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures, but I also claim it for the purpose of making the persons responsible pay for their Crimes
against humanity by at least forcing the mafia to retract their support for them by regressing against
them with the damages Romania must pay as legally obligated else I will also denounce the newest
legislation used by the mafia propaganda as hogwash as I knew it is, and as cover against any possible
discussion around the principle of unjust enrichment which is not applicable anyway against my claim
because it’s backed up jurisprudentially and according to the principle of equality before the law, I
declare with it I will fund human rights defending against the totalitarian states of the world, and safety
and litigation of global victims of the “psychiatry” charlatanry Crimes against humanity and other means
of totalitarian repression, starting with the chemically lobotomized institutionalized children from
Romania, the homeless, the Rroma minority, the elderly and other destitute or undereducated
categories of people unable to defend themselves, attacked by the Romanian “state” mafia for illicit
profit
0.3 In conclusion and in either way, this situation proves again the correctness of my deduction,
that EU and CoE are criminal and corrupt, so I congratulate and thank ECHR for hitting a new low in
political crappyness with its address, furthering my agenda of human rights defending
0.4 P.S. About anonymity. It’s not possible because first of all I’ve published both my Rule 39
ECHR urgent request for interim measures and my ICC penal complaint, and I’ve already brought it to
the attention of almost everyone I came in contact with, or contacted, meaning media, lawyers,
organizations etc., and I have no intention of being anonymous since popularity is protection against the
Romanian “state” mafia criminal sociopaths and the obvious directing ramifications from EU, CoE, UN,
CIA, the pharmaceutical mafia “concern” and other minor factions with interests in this international
level criminal activity
0.5 P.S. About the Romanian “state” mafia’s demanded answer by ECHR, I predict it will be a
mockery at the expense of justice as is ECHR’s decision, as I’ve witnessed for over 9 years as a human
rights defender against the Romanian “state” mafia, meaning without drastic and severe measures,
Romanian “state” mafia will destroy even without my help EU’s and CoE’s credibility as state of right
institutions, as it did so far. In short, Romania will not admit its Crimes against humanity and will not
amiably solve the situation paying damages and convicting the persons who committed Crimes against
humanity against me and others, and as proof I remind Romania through its Constitutional Court
Decision 25 from 19th January 2017 abolished the presumption of innocence and juridical logic along
with it, practically claiming innocents can be subjected to penal security measures which I’ve proven
means Torture, Bodily Harm and Qualified Murder through chemical lobotomization, which means
partial or total loss of life function, as notorious and as I’ve also proven in my ICC penal complaint

1. About first ECHR question, whether the felonies committed as pretexts and cover-up for the
Crimes against humanity committed against me by the Romanian “state” mafia have legal support,
question which can obviously only be posed by a schizophrenic since obviously Romania having ratified
UDHR and ECHR, it cannot logically have laws justifying Crimes against humanity nor other
Page 5 of 8
infringements of fundamental human rights, I enumerate the following proofs there is are no such laws
referring to annex 1 summary of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures which the lying
ECHR “judge” deliberately ignored as proven by the fact I’ve already demonstrated the following in
annex 11 summary of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures:
1.1 according to paragraph annex 1 paragraph 1 of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures, and article 265 paragraph 1 from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code, a mandate of home
breaking and arrest cannot exist without justification meaning before being subpoenaed. There is no
subpoena as proven in annex 11 summary from my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures
1.2 according to paragraph annex 1 paragraph 2 of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures, and article 265 paragraph 1 from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code, a mandate of home
breaking and arrest cannot exist without a justification demonstrating it’s ~“in the interest of solving the
cause”. There is no justification as proven in annex 11 summary from my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request
for interim measures
1.3 according to paragraph annex 1 paragraph 3 of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim
measures, and article 184 paragraph 1 from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code, only underage (14-16
years old) and mothers who killed their baby(-ies) can be presumed without discernment and subject to
the “psychiatric” charlatanry “examination” without their consent, even so infringing on the
presumption of innocence, and being aberrant since without consent means no cooperation, and
especially the mentally alienated lie therefore the “psychiatric” charlatanry hallucinations (subjective,
false or groundless declarations unlinked with reality) have no value in a real criminal investigation.
Because I am obviously neither underage but was between 34-37 years old when the Romanian “state”
mafia Crimes against humanity were committed against me, and I’m a male and cannot have babies to
kill them, article 184 paragraph 1 from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code does not apply to me
1.4 according to paragraph annex 1 paragraph 3.2 of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for
interim measures, and article 184 paragraph 3 from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code, a “psychiatric”
charlatanry “expertise” can’t be effectuated without the informed consent of the examinee given in
writing in the presence of his legal or conventional representant. I didn’t consent as proven by annex 11
summary of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures. In fact without consent no
examination meaning either relevant interview or observation can take place, which is the physical
reality logic of the law with which I corroborate
1.5. according to paragraph annex 1 paragraph 3.5 of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for
interim measures, and article 184 paragraph 4 from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code, only a person
who consented to be “examined” by a “psychiatrist” charlatan can be brought by force legally, as I note
only a mentally alienated person from the obvious reality “psychiatry” is charlatanry can ever consent to
be “examined” by a “psychiatrist” charlatan, ironically. Since I didn’t consent, no legal use of force,
home breaking etc. could’ve been committed against me, therefore it was an unlawful act of state
terrorism, incidental to the Romanian “state” mafia real intent of Qualifiedly Murder me to stop me
from denouncing its criminal activity, as Torturing and Bodily Harming me was
1.6. “judge” Dinu Murgulet Ana didn’t motivate the falsified decision from 4791/231/2017
because it’s impossible justifying breaking the law, according to article 264 paragraph 4 and 8 letter f,
and article 403 paragraph 1 letters c and d from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code. This is against
Article 6 from the Convention, where fair trial means legal trial
1.7 the laws, regulations, norms, deontology code and logic broke by the mafia “judge”

Page 6 of 8
caporegimes I enumerate in paragraph I.3 from annex 23
1.8 Furthermore, no security measure can be issued against an innocent according to article 4
from the Romanian Penal Procedure Code, article 23 paragraph 11 from the Romanian Constitution,
article 6 paragraph 2 from ECHR and article 11 from UDHR. Romania purposely abolished the
presumption of innocence an any juridical logic declaring in the Constitutional Court Decision no 25
from 19th January 2017, that innocents can be chemically lobotomized, as I’ve demonstrated in
sections I.B.11 and I.A.II.1.2^1.2.3 of my ICC penal complaint
1.9 In conclusion the detainment was unlawful in every possible way, there was no examination
as ever, all of which is not in accordance with Article 5 from the Convention. I remind the criminal ECHR
“judge” is downplaying the Romanian Crimes against humanity by lying Rule 39 urgent requests for
interim measures are not about the Article 2 - the right to life, implicitly physical and psychological
integrity, but about the right to private life

2. About second ECHR question, whether the obviously falsified decisions from 4909/231/2017
as demonstrated in annex 12 and annex 14 from my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures,
as pretexts and cover-up for the Crimes against humanity committed against me by the Romanian
“state” mafia have ~“sufficient guarantees against being arbitrary”, the answer is obviously to a 1st year
law student if not to anyone with common sense - there can’t be no judicial decision lacking any
element of the judicial syllogism, meaning a logical or consistent inference from a particular factual
premise meaning objectivized facts through administration of proofs yielding the truth beyond any
reasonable doubt, correlated with the universal premise of the law, and because the falsified decisions
from 4909/231/2017 were both illegal and groundless, the are as I’ve proven falsified with malice
aforethought, as pretexts and cover-up for the 7th Crimes against humanity committal against started
from 27th May 2017 when I was arrested from my law faculty exams by 3 mafia “secret policemen”
soldiers, incarcerated in the Focsani “psychiatric” gulag where 5 “psychiatric” torturers were waiting for
me as instructed by the mafia, tied to an operating table and injected with deadly fluorine and chlorine
neurotoxins daily and put in anaphylactic shock for at least 3 days without treatment being expected to
die, then after I survived I was forcefully chemically lobotomized with other deadly fluorine and chlorine
neurotoxins until 8th June 2017, which constitute the second committal of Crimes against humanity
against me, the latter deadly fluorine based neurotoxic poison being the same I was covertly injected
with in the night between 5th and 6th December 2014 which constitutes the first committal of Crimes
against humanity against me, as I objectivized in sections I.A.II.1.3.1^2 and I.B.22, respectively
I.A.II.1.3.1^7 and I.B.6, and I.A.I.1-2 from my ICC penal complaint, respectively chapter 1 of my Rule 39
ECHR urgent request for interim measures attached as annex 1 to this ICC penal complaint. The question
whether a rule of law system has ~“sufficient guarantees against being arbitrary” is imbecile, because
logic is universal and even if the human law is lacking, the universal God’s law of causality cannot be
broken, and if the manifestation of will is arbitrary, then authority does not derive from the rule of law
and a mandate from the people but from divine right and terrorism through abuse of violence, and I’ve
already demonstrated the mafia “magistrates” in Romanian declared themselves in official papers
sovereigns, and they constantly commit Crimes against humanity against the Romanian people and
even against the occasional unfortunate foreigner as it’s notorious in the press that an Italian was
forcefully incarcerated in one of the Romanian “psychiatric” gulags, chemically lobotomized until forced
Page 7 of 8
into committing suicide, as I’ve scientifically demonstrated the “psychiatry” charlatanry deadly drugs
causes in section I.A.II.1.2.8^1 of my ICC penal complaint, and homicidal ideation. Furthermore, this
question can obviously only be posed by a schizophrenic since obviously Romania having ratified UDHR
and ECHR, therefore it cannot logically have laws justifying Crimes against humanity, arbitrary or not,
nor other infringements of fundamental human rights. In conclusion the lying ECHR “judge” deliberately
ignored all logic in his stupefied eagerness to cover-up Romanian Crimes against humanity. As I’ve
demonstrated in annex 11 from my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures, the law forbids
judicial decisions without factual and legal motivation, in Romania, as is for ECHR according to Article 45
paragraph 1 from the Convention, and as it has always been, regardless whether the law was written or
simply social convention. However, there can be no guarantees against corruption as obvious the entire
Romanian “state” is owned by organized crime, in “business” with the mafia from EU and CoE at least,
as proven in my ICC penal complaint

3. About third ECHR question, whether the obviously as I’ve proven anyway in annex 19 falsified
decisions from 12718/231/2017 regarding my obligation to chemical lobotomization for the crimes and
diagnosis of Vasilache Daniel, because I was never indicted, convicted or diagnosed as demonstrated in
annex 17, 18, 19 and 20 summaries of my Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for interim measures, infringed
on my right to private life according to Article 8 from the Convention, it’s an imbecile question that
makes it again obvious that the lying ECHR “judge” downplays the infringement of my right to life,
physical and psychological integrity according to article 2 from ECHR and its implications as according to
Article 22 from the Romanian Constitution meaning the right to physical and psychical integrity,
emphasizing on the infringement of my right to private life, only referring to Article 2 as last, and only
through jurisprudence and not directly, and only referring to a persecution case involving the same
totalitarian Romanian “state” mafia abuse of the “psychiatry” charlatanry as a weapon, unrelated with
state terrorism and wrongful political repression of human rights defending as is my case which is classic
state terrorism for wrongful political repression, meaning the lying ECHR “judge” also attempts to divert
attention from this truth, that EU and CoE, ECHR implicitly, supports the totalitarian Romanian “state”
mafia by covering up its Crimes against humanity as I’ve already proven in my ICC penal complaint, by
destroying in various ways the previous 4 Rule 39 ECHR urgent requests for interim measures in the
interval of about 1 year and 4 months. About how my right to life, private and family life, and others
have been infringed upon, I’ve already demonstrated in my latest Rule 39 ECHR urgent request for
interim measures, and at detail in my ICC penal complaint to which I refers for full demonstration in
each annex. In short, I’ve proven my reasoning for becoming a permanent refugee in annex 21 of my
Rule 39 urgent request for interim measures, and I point out the lying ECHR “judge” also didn’t motivate
the dismissal of all my proven infringements of ECHR articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 17, because
he can’t contradict my logic as is impossible to justify breaking the law

18th November 2018

Page 8 of 8