PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 5123/07) against the Federal Republic of Germany lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Bulgarian national, Mr Georgiev Cvetan Rangelov (“the applicant”), on 12 October 2004.

The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was initially represented by Ms U. Groos and subsequently by Mr J. Oelbermann, both lawyers practising in Berlin. The German Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agents, Mrs A. Wittling-Vogel, Ministerialdirigentin, and Mr H.-J. Behrens, Ministerialrat, of the Federal Ministry of Justice.

The applicant alleged that the execution of the preventive detention order against him had violated Articles 5 § 1 and 14 of the Convention because in view of his foreign nationality, he had been refused important measures putting him in a position to prove that he was no longer dangerous to the public.

On 7 March 2007 the application was communicated to the Government. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1).

The Government of Bulgaria, having been informed of their right to intervene in the proceedings (Article 36 § 1 of the Convention and Rule 44 of the Rules of Court), did not indicate that they wished to exercise that right.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1961. When lodging his application, he was detained in Straubing Prison (Germany). He is currently detained in Grad Vraca (Bulgaria).

A. The applicant’s previous convictions, the order for his preventive detention and for his expulsion

The applicant entered Germany in 1979. He has been convicted some fifteen times since 1980, notably of theft and burglary. In particular, on 1 March 1984 the Kempten District Court convicted him of three counts of joint theft as a member of a gang and sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment. On 7 October 1988 the Munich I Regional Court convicted the applicant of six counts of burglary and one count of attempted burglary and sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment. On 1 October 1993 the Munich District Court convicted the applicant of joint attempted burglary, committed approximately one month after his release from prison, and sentenced him to one year and six months’ imprisonment.

On 21 December 1994 the applicant was arrested and remanded in detention.

On 26 January 1996 the Munich I Regional Court convicted the applicant of eight counts of burglary and attempted burglary, committed only a few months after his release from prison, and sentenced him to eight years and six months’ imprisonment. It found that by breaking into different shops, the applicant had stolen goods worth some 140,000 Deutschmarks (approximately 71,581 euros). It further ordered the applicant’s preventive detention pursuant to Article 66 § 1 of the Criminal Code (see paragraphs 40-41 below). Having regard to an expert report, the court found that the applicant had a propensity to commit offences by which serious economic damage was caused and was therefore dangerous to the public.

By a decision of 16 April 1997, supplemented on 29 October 1997, the city of Munich ordered the applicant’s expulsion to Bulgaria and prohibited him to re-enter Germany for an indefinite duration in view of his criminal convictions. It authorised the applicant’s expulsion directly from prison as soon as he had served his sentence. The expulsion order became final on 30 December 1997, the regional government of Upper Bavaria having dismissed the applicant’s appeal on 25 November 1997.

In the plan governing the execution of the applicant’s sentence, drawn up by the Straubing Prison authorities and presented to the applicant on 9 October 1997, it is noted that the applicant’s transfer to a social therapeutic institution, relaxations in the conditions of his detention and preparations for his release were not envisaged as the city of Munich had issued a deportation order against him.

On 7 January 2002 the Erlangen Prison authorities informed the applicant, who was at that time detained in Straubing Prison, that it was not possible to transfer him to Erlangen in order to enable him to participate in a social therapy because he was liable to be expelled after having served his prison sentence.

The applicant served his full prison sentence until 19 June 2003. Since then, he was remanded in preventive detention.

B. The proceedings at issue

1. The decision of the Regional Court

On 21 August 2003 the Regensburg Regional Court, in review proceedings pursuant to Article 67c § 1 of the Criminal Code (see paragraph 42 below), decided that the execution of the applicant’s preventive detention was still necessary in view of its objective.

On 1 December 2003 the Nuremberg Court of Appeal, allowing the applicant’s appeal, quashed the decision of 21 August 2003 and remitted the case to the Regional Court. It found that the Regional Court had not been entitled to authorise one of its judges to hear the applicant alone instead of hearing him in its full composition without giving reasons for doing so. Moreover, the refusal of the Straubing Prison authorities to allow the applicant’s defence counsel to inspect his personal files had violated the right to a fair trial.

The applicant’s counsel was subsequently granted access to the applicant’s personal files at Straubing Prison.

On 26 February 2004 the Regensburg Regional Court, having heard the applicant on 15 January 2004 and the applicant and the two experts W. and T. on 19 February 2004, again decided that the execution of the applicant’s preventive detention was necessary in view of its objective (Article 67c § 1 of the Criminal Code). It therefore refused to suspend the execution of the applicant’s preventive detention and to grant probation.

Having regard to the report submitted by the expert for forensic psychiatry W., the Regional Court found that it was very likely that the applicant would reoffend if released. He had been convicted of burglary on numerous occasions and had reoffended shortly after having served long prison sentences. As confirmed by a report submitted by the Straubing Prison authorities dated 17 January 2003 and by the applicant’s statements at the hearing, the applicant continuously refused critically to reflect on his offences and felt persecuted and wrongfully convicted by the German courts.

The Regional Court considered that there were also no other elements indicating that the applicant was no longer inclined to reoffend. It noted that according to expert W., it was advisable for the applicant to participate in a social therapy. It conceded that the applicant had not been admitted to a social therapy in Erlangen Prison he had applied for in 2002. The conditions of his detention had also not been relaxed (Vollzugslockerungen). Both of these measures were important conditions for arriving at a prognosis that he was no longer dangerous to the public. However, this did not alter the fact that the applicant kept posing a risk to the public.

According to the Regional Court, the applicant’s preventive detention was also not disproportionate. As the applicant was not a German national it was unlikely that the prison authorities, having regard to the usual practice, would relax his conditions of detention. He had further been refused a social therapy in view of his imminent expulsion. The court considered that it was illegal to retain a convicted person in preventive detention for an indefinite period of time only as a consequence of his foreign nationality and the resulting refusal of relaxed conditions of imprisonment. The Public Prosecutor’s Office would have to consider this issue when deciding on a fresh motion lodged by the applicant to suspend his preventive detention pursuant to Article 456a of the Code of Criminal Procedure (see paragraph 45 below). Otherwise, a suspension of the preventive detention order against the applicant on probation could have to be ordered in the future for reasons of proportionality even without the conditions of his detention having previously been relaxed.

2. The decision of the Nuremberg Court of Appeal

On 23 April 2004 the Nuremberg Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the Regional Court’s decision of 26 February 2004.

Endorsing the reasons given by the Regional Court, the Court of Appeal found that the applicant was still dangerous to the public. He had also proved obstinate in prison and had to be punished three times in 2003 for having insulted the prison staff. Due to the fact that the applicant, as confirmed by expert W., refused to take responsibility for his past offences, there were no suitable measures to prepare the applicant adequately for his release. As the applicant was in preventive detention only since 20 June 2003, the execution of this measure was still proportionate.

3. The decision of the Federal Constitutional Court

On 27 May 2004 the applicant, represented by counsel, lodged a constitutional complaint with the Federal Constitutional Court. He notably argued that his right to freedom as guaranteed by Article 2 § 2 of the Basic Law was violated because his preventive detention was disproportionate. Moreover, he claimed that the refusal to admit him to a social therapy due to his imminent expulsion discriminated him because of his Bulgarian nationality and therefore disregarded his right to equality under Article 3 of the Basic Law.

On 28 September 2004 the Federal Constitutional Court refused to admit the applicant’s constitutional complaint and to grant him legal aid (no. 2 BvR 1079/04). It found that his complaint had no prospects of success. There was nothing to indicate that the criminal courts, in reaching their decision under Article 67c § 1 of the Criminal Code, notably in finding that the applicant was still dangerous, had failed duly to consider human dignity and the right to freedom as guaranteed by the Basic Law.

The Federal Constitutional Court confirmed that measures relaxing the conditions of detention were a decisive factor for the prognosis of a convicted person’s dangerousness. However, the applicant neither claimed to have applied for such measures in the course of his preventive detention nor to have been unlawfully refused such measures. The decisions of the criminal courts were also not based on the fact that until then, no such measures had been granted. As regards therapeutic measures, the criminal courts had rightly pointed out that due to the applicant’s persistent refusal to accept responsibility for his offences there were no suitable measures to prepare him adequately for his release.

C. Subsequent developments

Proceedings concerning relaxations in the conditions of the applicant’s detention

On 25 November 2004 the Straubing District Court dismissed the applicant’s request for measures relaxing the conditions of his preventive detention, notably leave under escort for one day under the supervision of two prison officers. It argued that he might abscond on that occasion. The applicant’s appeal on points of law against this decision to the Nuremberg Court of Appeal was to no avail. On 14 March 2006 the Straubing Prison authorities dismissed another request made by the applicant to relax his conditions of preventive detention on the same grounds.

2. Proceedings concerning the applicant’s admission to a therapy

On 17 December 2004 the Erlangen Prison again declared not to consent to a transfer of the applicant from Straubing Prison to it in order to admit the applicant to a social therapy. It argued that it was not in a position to prepare the applicant, who was liable to be expelled, for a life without offences in Bulgaria. The living conditions in that country were not known to the therapists. On 31 January 2005 the Nuremberg-Fürth Regional Court dismissed as inadmissible the applicant’s request to declare that refusal unlawful. It found that it were the Straubing Prison authorities which were competent to decide on the applicant’s transfer to a different prison.

3. Judicial review of the applicant’s preventive detention

On 21 December 2006 the Regensburg Regional Court, reviewing the necessity of the applicant’s preventive detention under Articles 67d § 2 and 67e of the Criminal Code (see paragraphs 43-44 below), refused to suspend the execution of the applicant’s preventive detention order on probation. Having regard to the report of psychiatric expert A. it had consulted, it found that there was still a risk that the applicant would commit further serious offences against the property of others (but no violent offences) if released.

The Regional Court considered that the applicant’s continued preventive detention was still proportionate. It conceded that it was problematic that no measures at all were planned by the prison authorities to further the applicant’s reintegration into society. Moreover, owing to, in particular, his foreign nationality, the applicant could not expect any relaxations in the conditions of his detention. In practice, the latter were a precondition for coming to an assessment that a detainee was no longer dangerous to the public. Therefore, the court would have to decide at the next periodic review of the applicant’s preventive detention whether the applicant was to be released for reasons of proportionality, despite the fact that he had not previously been granted relaxations in the conditions of his detention and had not been considered as no longer posing a threat to the public.

On 12 March 2007 the Nuremberg Court of Appeal, endorsing the reasons given by the Regional Court, dismissed the applicant’s appeal. It noted, in particular, that expert A. had considered that there was no starting point for beginning with measures preparing the applicant’s conditional release. As he contested having committed the property offences he had been found guilt of, he could not critically reflect on his criminal behaviour. Therefore, relaxations in the conditions of the applicant’s detention, which were very important to arrive at a prognosis that a person was no longer dangerous to the public, had not been refused without good cause.

4. Proceedings under Article 456a of the Code of Criminal Procedure

(a) First set of proceedings 31. On 16 February 2005 the Munich I Public Prosecutor’s Office dismissed the applicant’s request to suspend the execution of his preventive detention in view of his imminent expulsion under Article 456a of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On 25 April 2005 the General Public Prosecutor dismissed the applicant’s appeal. 32. On 12 July 2005 the Munich Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s request for judicial review. Endorsing the reasons given by the prosecution authorities, it found that there was still a risk that the applicant reoffended and that he was still was not conscious of his guilt. In these circumstances, a therapeutic treatment was without prospects of success. 33. On 19 June 2007 the Federal Constitutional Court declined to consider the applicant’s constitutional complaint (file no. 2 BvR 1676/05). It found that the decision of the Court of Appeal to consider as lawful the prosecution’s balancing between the public interest in the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention and the applicant’s interest in his personal liberty had – at least at that time – not been unconstitutional. (b) Second set of proceedings 34. On 7 November 2005 the Munich I Public Prosecutor’s Office dismissed another request made by the applicant to suspend the execution of his preventive detention under Article 456a of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the same grounds. 35. The applicant’s appeals were to no avail. In its decision of 16 May 2006 the Munich Court of Appeal noted, in particular, that it might appear contradictory to the applicant that measures aiming at his reintegration into society, such as a social therapy, were refused to him because of the deportation order against him, but that the authorities nevertheless refused to suspend the execution of his preventive detention under Article 456a of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the refusal of the said measures alone did not mean that the prosecution authorities could only exercise their discretion in a lawful manner by granting his request under the said provision. (c) Third set of proceedings 36. On 7 September 2007 the Munich I Public Prosecutor’s Office decided to suspend the execution of the applicant’s preventive detention at the date of his expulsion to Bulgaria, and on 1 November 2007 at the earliest, under Article 456a of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 37. On 13 December 2007 the applicant was expelled to Bulgaria in accordance with the deportation order issued by the city of Munich on 16 April 1997.

5. Further developments

On 30 November 2009 the Korneuburg Regional Court (Austria) convicted the applicant of two counts of murder, one count of attempted murder and robbery with firearms, committed on 1 June 2009 in Austria and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The judgment was upheld on appeal. The applicant was subsequently transferred to Bulgaria in order to serve his sentence.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e1
001-109791_a11_em1
CODE
DIRECT
5123/07
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-109791_a11_e2
001-109791_a11_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Republic of Germany
ETHNIC
check
001-109791_a11_e3
001-109791_a11_em3
DEM
QUASI
Bulgarian
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e4
001-109791_a11_em4
PERSON
DIRECT
Mr Georgiev Cvetan Rangelov
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e5
001-109791_a11_em5
DATETIME
QUASI
12 October 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e6
001-109791_a11_em6
PERSON
QUASI
Ms U. Groos
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e7
001-109791_a11_em7
PERSON
QUASI
Mr J. Oelbermann
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e8
001-109791_a11_em8
LOC
NO_MASK
Berlin
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e2
001-109791_a11_em9
ORG
NO_MASK
001-109791_a11_em2
German Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e2
001-109791_a11_em10
ORG
NO_MASK
001-109791_a11_em2
Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e9
001-109791_a11_em11
PERSON
QUASI
Mrs A. Wittling-Vogel
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e10
001-109791_a11_em12
PERSON
QUASI
Mr H.-J. Behrens
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e11
001-109791_a11_em13
DATETIME
QUASI
7 March 2007
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e2
001-109791_a11_em14
ORG
NO_MASK
Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e12
001-109791_a11_em15
ORG
QUASI
Government of Bulgaria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e13
001-109791_a11_em16
DATETIME
QUASI
1961
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em17
LOC
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e15
001-109791_a11_em18
LOC
NO_MASK
Germany
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-109791_a11_e16
001-109791_a11_em19
LOC
QUASI
Grad Vraca
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e17
001-109791_a11_em20
LOC
QUASI
Bulgaria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e18
001-109791_a11_em21
PERSON
NO_MASK
A.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-109791_a11_e15
001-109791_a11_em22
LOC
NO_MASK
Germany
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e19
001-109791_a11_em23
DATETIME
QUASI
1979
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e20
001-109791_a11_em24
QUANTITY
QUASI
fifteen times
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e21
001-109791_a11_em25
DATETIME
NO_MASK
1980
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e22
001-109791_a11_em26
DATETIME
QUASI
1 March 1984
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e23
001-109791_a11_em27
ORG
QUASI
Kempten District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e24
001-109791_a11_em28
DATETIME
QUASI
three years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e25
001-109791_a11_em29
DATETIME
QUASI
7 October 1988
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e26
001-109791_a11_em30
ORG
QUASI
Munich I Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e27
001-109791_a11_em31
DATETIME
NO_MASK
five years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e28
001-109791_a11_em32
DATETIME
QUASI
1 October 1993
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e29
001-109791_a11_em33
ORG
QUASI
Munich District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e30
001-109791_a11_em34
DATETIME
NO_MASK
approximately one month
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e31
001-109791_a11_em35
DATETIME
NO_MASK
one year and six months
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e32
001-109791_a11_em36
DATETIME
QUASI
21 December 1994
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e33
001-109791_a11_em37
DATETIME
QUASI
26 January 1996
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e26
001-109791_a11_em38
ORG
QUASI
Munich I Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e34
001-109791_a11_em39
DATETIME
NO_MASK
only a few months
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e35
001-109791_a11_em40
DATETIME
QUASI
eight years and six months
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e36
001-109791_a11_em41
QUANTITY
QUASI
140,000 Deutschmarks
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e37
001-109791_a11_em42
QUANTITY
QUASI
71,581 euros
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e38
001-109791_a11_em43
DATETIME
QUASI
16 April 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e39
001-109791_a11_em44
DATETIME
QUASI
29 October 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e40
001-109791_a11_em45
ORG
QUASI
city of Munich
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e17
001-109791_a11_em46
LOC
QUASI
Bulgaria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e15
001-109791_a11_em47
LOC
NO_MASK
Germany
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e41
001-109791_a11_em48
DATETIME
QUASI
30 December 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e42
001-109791_a11_em49
ORG
NO_MASK
government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e43
001-109791_a11_em50
LOC
QUASI
Upper Bavaria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e44
001-109791_a11_em51
DATETIME
QUASI
25 November 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em52
ORG
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e45
001-109791_a11_em53
DATETIME
QUASI
9 October 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e40
001-109791_a11_em54
ORG
QUASI
city of Munich
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e46
001-109791_a11_em55
DATETIME
QUASI
7 January 2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e47
001-109791_a11_em56
ORG
QUASI
001-109791_a11_em58
Erlangen Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em57
LOC
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-109791_a11_e47
001-109791_a11_em58
ORG
QUASI
Erlangen
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e48
001-109791_a11_em59
DATETIME
QUASI
19 June 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em60
ORG
QUASI
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e50
001-109791_a11_em61
DATETIME
QUASI
21 August 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em62
ORG
QUASI
001-109791_a11_em60
Regensburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e51
001-109791_a11_em63
DATETIME
QUASI
1 December 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e52
001-109791_a11_em64
ORG
QUASI
Nuremberg Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e50
001-109791_a11_em65
DATETIME
QUASI
21 August 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em66
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em67
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em68
LOC
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em69
LOC
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e53
001-109791_a11_em70
DATETIME
QUASI
26 February 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em71
ORG
QUASI
Regensburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e54
001-109791_a11_em72
DATETIME
QUASI
15 January 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e55
001-109791_a11_em73
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e56
001-109791_a11_em74
PERSON
NO_MASK
T.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e57
001-109791_a11_em75
DATETIME
QUASI
19 February 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-109791_a11_e55
001-109791_a11_em76
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em77
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em78
LOC
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e58
001-109791_a11_em79
DATETIME
QUASI
17 January 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em80
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e55
001-109791_a11_em81
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e47
001-109791_a11_em82
LOC
QUASI
Erlangen Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e59
001-109791_a11_em83
DATETIME
NO_MASK
2002
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em84
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e60
001-109791_a11_em85
ORG
NO_MASK
Public Prosecutor’s Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e52
001-109791_a11_em86
ORG
QUASI
Nuremberg Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e61
001-109791_a11_em87
DATETIME
QUASI
23 April 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e52
001-109791_a11_em88
ORG
QUASI
Nuremberg Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em89
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e53
001-109791_a11_em90
DATETIME
QUASI
26 February 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em91
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e52
001-109791_a11_em92
ORG
NO_MASK
001-109791_a11_em86
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e62
001-109791_a11_em93
DATETIME
NO_MASK
2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e55
001-109791_a11_em94
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e63
001-109791_a11_em95
DATETIME
QUASI
20 June 2003
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e64
001-109791_a11_em96
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e65
001-109791_a11_em97
DATETIME
QUASI
27 May 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e64
001-109791_a11_em98
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
ETHNIC
check
001-109791_a11_e3
001-109791_a11_em99
DEM
QUASI
Bulgarian
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e66
001-109791_a11_em100
DATETIME
QUASI
28 September 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e64
001-109791_a11_em101
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e67
001-109791_a11_em102
CODE
DIRECT
1079/04
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e64
001-109791_a11_em103
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e68
001-109791_a11_em104
DATETIME
QUASI
25 November 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e69
001-109791_a11_em105
ORG
QUASI
Straubing District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e70
001-109791_a11_em106
DATETIME
NO_MASK
one day
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e52
001-109791_a11_em107
ORG
QUASI
Nuremberg Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e71
001-109791_a11_em108
DATETIME
QUASI
14 March 2006
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em109
ORG
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e72
001-109791_a11_em110
DATETIME
QUASI
17 December 2004
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-109791_a11_e47
001-109791_a11_em111
ORG
QUASI
Erlangen Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em112
LOC
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e17
001-109791_a11_em113
LOC
QUASI
Bulgaria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e73
001-109791_a11_em114
DATETIME
QUASI
31 January 2005
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e74
001-109791_a11_em115
ORG
QUASI
Nuremberg-Fürth Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em116
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e14
001-109791_a11_em117
ORG
QUASI
Straubing Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e75
001-109791_a11_em118
DATETIME
QUASI
21 December 2006
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em119
ORG
QUASI
Regensburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e18
001-109791_a11_em120
PERSON
NO_MASK
A.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em121
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e76
001-109791_a11_em122
DATETIME
QUASI
12 March 2007
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e52
001-109791_a11_em123
ORG
QUASI
Nuremberg Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e49
001-109791_a11_em124
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e18
001-109791_a11_em125
PERSON
NO_MASK
A.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e77
001-109791_a11_em126
DATETIME
QUASI
16 February 2005
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e78
001-109791_a11_em127
ORG
QUASI
Munich I Public Prosecutor’s Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e79
001-109791_a11_em128
DATETIME
QUASI
25 April 2005
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e80
001-109791_a11_em129
ORG
NO_MASK
General Public Prosecutor
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e81
001-109791_a11_em130
DATETIME
QUASI
12 July 2005
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e82
001-109791_a11_em131
ORG
QUASI
Munich Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e83
001-109791_a11_em132
DATETIME
QUASI
19 June 2007
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e64
001-109791_a11_em133
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e84
001-109791_a11_em134
CODE
DIRECT
1676/05
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e52
001-109791_a11_em135
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e85
001-109791_a11_em136
DATETIME
QUASI
7 November 2005
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e78
001-109791_a11_em137
ORG
QUASI
Munich I Public Prosecutor’s Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e86
001-109791_a11_em138
DATETIME
QUASI
16 May 2006
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e82
001-109791_a11_em139
ORG
QUASI
Munich Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e87
001-109791_a11_em140
DATETIME
QUASI
7 September 2007
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e78
001-109791_a11_em141
ORG
QUASI
Munich I Public Prosecutor’s Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e17
001-109791_a11_em142
LOC
QUASI
Bulgaria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e88
001-109791_a11_em143
DATETIME
QUASI
1 November 2007
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e89
001-109791_a11_em144
DATETIME
QUASI
13 December 2007
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e17
001-109791_a11_em145
LOC
QUASI
Bulgaria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e40
001-109791_a11_em146
ORG
QUASI
city of Munich
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e38
001-109791_a11_em147
DATETIME
QUASI
16 April 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e90
001-109791_a11_em148
DATETIME
QUASI
30 November 2009
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e91
001-109791_a11_em149
ORG
QUASI
Korneuburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e92
001-109791_a11_em150
ORG
QUASI
Austria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-109791_a11_e93
001-109791_a11_em151
MISC
QUASI
two counts of murder, one count of attempted murder and robbery with firearms
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e94
001-109791_a11_em152
DATETIME
QUASI
1 June 2009
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e92
001-109791_a11_em153
LOC
QUASI
Austria
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-109791_a11_e17
001-109791_a11_em154
LOC
QUASI
Bulgaria
Georgiev Cvetan Rangelov
DEU
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Georgiev Cvetan Rangelov