Collective sentences passed in Sweden. Nixon Núñez, excommunicated by law.
A few days ago the Administrative Supreme Court of Stockholm rejected the appeal of the artist Nixon Núñez concerning his right to public defense and notified him that his claim will not be subject of revision on the part of the Court (case nr 7041, sentence of the 9 of December 2003 rejecting the revision of the subject of the appeal). Thus, the previous sentence of the Court of Appeal of Stockholm is ratified, a sentence in which Nixon Núñez’ request for public defense is turned down with the argument that it is incumbent on the court to analyse the claim of Mr. Núñez and that a public defender not is necessary in this type of cases. To date Nixon Núñez has paid 30,000 euros for his defense and will have to continue paying until his case arrives at the Court of the European Communities of Luxembourg. The right to public defense is a human right and one of the bases of the Convention of Human rights that Sweden has signed and has pledged to respect.
Every year approximately 20,000 citizens appeal to the Administrative Supreme Court in Sweden. The Administrative Supreme Court grants the right of revision of their cases to 40 persons per year. The rest, the immense majority of appeals, are put together in categories to be rejected collectively under the direction of a Reporter. In the case of Nixon Núñez the Reporter was Leif Bergqvist, who without any type of motivation rejected the claim presented by the lawyer of Mr. Núñez. The Reporter presented the appeal of Nixon Núñez jointly with a series of other appeals before the three judges Nordborg, Wennerström and Dexe, who collectively rejected it together with the rest of the appeals and without putting their signature to the corresponding document. Two of these judges, Nordborg and Wennerström, rejected a year ago the demand presented by Nixon Núñez for the inhibition of the sentence referring to his personal assistance. Appeals are thus denied through collective sentences which the responsible judges do not even sign. They simply put a cross in the corresponding square. These sentences, however, are not called sentences but notifications.
The right to public defense is a human right established by the European Convention of Human rights. The collective sentences lack legal value and constitute a crime against the human rights. The right to a fair trial before a neutral court must also be respected by the Swedish State. In July 1993 the lawyer of Nixon Núñez, Dennis Brinkeback, published an article in the Swedish newspaper Expressen entitled ”Excommunicated by law” in which he made reference to the farce of the administrative courts in Sweden and to the sentences of these courts which he called ”a complete farce”. Very little he has changed since then but the Swedish press keeps very quiet when it comes to this type of abuse of authority. We therefore kindly ask you to spread this information in any way you can.
A few days ago the Administrative Supreme Court of Stockholm rejected the appeal of the artist Nixon Núñez concerning his right to public defense and notified him that his claim will not be subject of revision on the part of the Court (case nr 7041, sentence of the 9 of December 2003 rejecting the revision of the subject of the appeal). Thus, the previous sentence of the Court of Appeal of Stockholm is ratified, a sentence in which Nixon Núñez’ request for public defense is turned down with the argument that it is incumbent on the court to analyse the claim of Mr. Núñez and that a public defender not is necessary in this type of cases. To date Nixon Núñez has paid 30,000 euros for his defense and will have to continue paying until his case arrives at the Court of the European Communities of Luxembourg. The right to public defense is a human right and one of the bases of the Convention of Human rights that Sweden has signed and has pledged to respect.
Every year approximately 20,000 citizens appeal to the Administrative Supreme Court in Sweden. The Administrative Supreme Court grants the right of revision of their cases to 40 persons per year. The rest, the immense majority of appeals, are put together in categories to be rejected collectively under the direction of a Reporter. In the case of Nixon Núñez the Reporter was Leif Bergqvist, who without any type of motivation rejected the claim presented by the lawyer of Mr. Núñez. The Reporter presented the appeal of Nixon Núñez jointly with a series of other appeals before the three judges Nordborg, Wennerström and Dexe, who collectively rejected it together with the rest of the appeals and without putting their signature to the corresponding document. Two of these judges, Nordborg and Wennerström, rejected a year ago the demand presented by Nixon Núñez for the inhibition of the sentence referring to his personal assistance. Appeals are thus denied through collective sentences which the responsible judges do not even sign. They simply put a cross in the corresponding square. These sentences, however, are not called sentences but notifications.
The right to public defense is a human right established by the European Convention of Human rights. The collective sentences lack legal value and constitute a crime against the human rights. The right to a fair trial before a neutral court must also be respected by the Swedish State. In July 1993 the lawyer of Nixon Núñez, Dennis Brinkeback, published an article in the Swedish newspaper Expressen entitled ”Excommunicated by law” in which he made reference to the farce of the administrative courts in Sweden and to the sentences of these courts which he called ”a complete farce”. Very little he has changed since then but the Swedish press keeps very quiet when it comes to this type of abuse of authority. We therefore kindly ask you to spread this information in any way you can.
e-mail:
Homepage:
