I. Introduction

This article is a follow-up to previous articles with the same title "Protection of Human Rights at International Organizations - only a Fiction"? These articles prove the poor protection of human rights at the institutions that have been established to protect them - in this case the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (hereinafter "ECtHR") and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

- First of all, I would like to point out that the claims and facts presented in my articles are proven by written documents - decisions of administrative authorities, courts and the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic.

II. Reasons for writing the article.

The reason for writing this article (which follows on the previous ones) is to inform the reader about the way in which complaints concerning the failure of the Council of Europe (hereinafter "CoE") to fulfil its main task - the duty to ensure justice - are dealt with.

In this case, the handling of a written complaint dated 26 October 2022 is involved. The written complaint was sent to the address of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Marija Pejcinovic Buricová, by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt via the Czech Post on 26 October 2022.

The Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Marija Pejcinovic Buric, has not responded to this complaint (concerning the failure of the Council of Europe (CE) to fulfil its main task) yet. The complaint concerns:

a) Violation of the main task of the Czech Republicand the CE–i. e. to ensure justice and rule of law.

b) Repeated Complaint dated 01 August 2022 ("Repeated Complaint dated 01 August 2022") filed with theECtHR on 01 August 2022 - the document was included as an evidencein the submission sent to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe on 26 October 2022.

c) Unlawful administrative acts (hereinafter referred to as "unlawful administrative acts") carried out by the Znojmoand TrebicSurveying Centres - illegal change of ownership in the property register for the parents' property in 1979 and in 1987. The evidences are specified in the Repeated Complaint dated 01.08.2022 and in the complaint sent to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe on 26 October 2022.

ad a) Violation of the main task of the Czech Republic and the CE - ensuring justice: The main task of the States - you can find it already in the Bible, as well as in the ancient philosophers written works - is to ensure justice. The same can be concluded for the CE which main and established task is to secure justice. There is no more important task for the States and the CE.

- If the State and CE are unable to provide justice, or if there is such widespread injustice as in my case, the State and CE are failing without any doubts. And it doesn't really matter who represents it externally.

ad b) Repeated complaint of 01.08.2022: In the complaint I base my allegations of violation of the main task (ensuring justice) by the Czech Republic and the CE on the written evidences presented in the Repeated complaint of 01.08.2022 - sent to the ECtHR by a registered letter with delivery via the Czech Post on 01.08.2022.

- The ECtHR has not responded to the Repeated Complaint of 01.08.2022 yet.

- In the Czech Republic, the administrative authorities and the Courts have been dealing with the matter referred to in the Repeated Complaint of 01.08.2022 for more than 36 years. What an unbelievable long time!

- The first written complaint to the ECtHR on this matter was filed in the last century.

ad c) Unlawful administrative acts: it should be stressed that in the Czech Republic, as well as in many other countries, the actions and acts of administrative authorities are bound by law in such a way that an administrative authority can only do what the law permits and shall obey what the law commands.

- An unlawful administrative act is contrary to law, a normative act, as well as contrary to international treaties by which the Czech Republic has been bound - the ex officio obligation to remedy such acts is the annulment of these unlawful administrative acts.

- Hearing of the case related to the inheritance after my deceased father: In the course of the inheritance proceeding after my deceased father (he died after a serious long-term illness in 1987), I found out that my parents' property is incorrectly registered in the real estate register at the Centre of Geodesy Trebic (cadastral areaMoravskéBudejovice) and Znojmo (ŠtítarynaMorave) - some of the properties were not and still have not been registered as the parents' property, or are registered with a reduced area compared to that one stated in the purchase contract.

Illegal administrative acts realized by the Znojmo Geodesy Centre and the Trebic Geodesy Centre: I base my allegations about illegal administrative acts realized by the Znojmo Geodesy Centre and the Trebic Geodesy Centre on the contents of the archives of the geodesy centres (now cadastral offices).

- In the inheritance proceedings after my deceased father, I did not have at my disposal a written proof on anydeprivation of my parents' property rights to real estate in the cadastral territory of MoravskéBudejovice and in the cadastral territory of ŠtítarynaMorave›.

- For this reason, I asked the Centre of Geodesy Trebic and the Centre of Geodesy Znojmo for a copy of the written documents stored in the archives on the basis of which the change of ownership of my parents' property in the real estate register was made.

From the content of the archives I found that the change of ownership made by the surveying centres in the real estate register of the parents' property in the cadastral territory Štítaryin Moravia (the change made in 1979) and in the cadastral territory of MoravskéBudejovice (the change made in 1987) was realized contrary to the laws effective at that time:

a) I have not found anywritten document in the archives of the surveying centres proving that the surveying centres would have made a change of ownership in accordance with:

1. § Section 4(1) of Act No.22/1964 Coll. on the Real Estate Register, which reads as follows: "The registration of legal relations concerning immovable property shall be made on the basis of final decisions of courts, national committees, state notaries or other bodies and organisations authorised to decide on legal relations concerning immovable property, or on the basis of contracts and other documents, or proposals of bodies and organisations authorised to do so under special regulations. ..... .".

2. § Section 3(1), first sentence, of Act No. 71/1964 Coll., Administrative Procedure Code, which reads as follows: "Administrative authorities shall proceed in proceedings in accordance with laws and other legal regulations.".

b) In the archives of the surveying centres I have not foundany written document proving that the change in the real estate registration at the surveying centres would have been made with the participation and knowledge of my parents as it was required by the then effective:

1. § Section 4(1) of Act No 22/1964 Coll. on the registration of immovable property, which reads as follows: "The registration of immovable property shall be maintained by the surveying authorities in accordance with the actual state of affairs on the basis of notified changes, local surveys or measurements, where appropriate, and with the cooperation of the authorities, organisations and citizens concerned".

2. § Section 3(2) of Act No. 71/1967 Coll., Administrative Procedure Code, which reads as follows: "Administrative authorities are obliged to proceed in proceedings in close cooperation with citizens and organisations and to give them the opportunity at all times to defend their rights and interests effectively, in particular to comment on the basis of the decision and to submit their proposals. The administrative authorities must provide assistance and guidance to citizens and organisations so that they are not prejudiced in the proceedings by ignorance of the law."

III. Violation of the provisions of Section 36(1)(a) of Act No. 256/2013 Coll., the Cadastral Act, as amended – violations realized by the Cadastral Office (legal successors of the surveying centres)

The change of the ownership in the real estate register made in 1979 by the Znojmo Geodesy Centre and the change of ownership in the real estate register made in 1987 by the Trebic Geodesy Centre in the parents' property are demonstrably "illegal administrative acts" (they do not meet the requirements as set by at that time effective law) - the ex officio obligation to remedy these violations shall have resulted in the annulment of these illegal administrative acts.

a) Courts or other decision-making bodies must take account of the "illegal administrative act" of the Znojmo Surveying Centre without time limitation and without a motion, i.e. on the basis of their "official duty".

b) From last century until now, I have been invoking (referring) to this "official duty" of the Courts and other decision-making bodies continuously and to no avail since 1987.

III. a Breach of the duty by the cadastral authorities: the cadastral authorities (legal successors of the geodesy centres) are obliged to correct erroneous data in the cadastre when they find an "unlawful administrative act". They are obliged to realize a remedy without any submitted application/petition just on the basis of their "official duty" - see the obligation set out in the provisions of Section 36(1)(a) of Act No. 256/2013 Coll, "Upon a written proposal of the owner or other authorised person or even without a proposal, the cadastral office shall correct erroneous cadastral data which have been caused by a) an obvious error in the maintenance and renewal of the cadastre, .....".

- In this case, by correcting the error, my parents would beagain registered as the owner of the property in question on the relevant title deeds in the property register. This change (remedy) will make passing the ownership right to their legal successor.

IV. Violations of human rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the Czech Republic and International Treaties by which the Czech Republic is bound

In the Repeated Complaint of 01.08.2022 I objectviolations of my rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the Czech Republic and international treaties violated in the Czech Republic since 1987 - see below:

IV.a Violation of my constitutional right for the protection of my ownership acquired by inheritance from my deceased father: In my opinion, there is an evident violation of my constitutional right which grants the protection for my ownership rights acquired by inheritance from my deceased father as established and specified under:

a) Article 11(1) of the Bill of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, which reads, "Everyone has the right to own property. The right to property of all owners shall have the same legal content and protection. Succession (inheritance)is guaranteed".

b) Article 1 of the Additional Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which reads: "Every natural orlegal person isentitled to thepeacefulenjoymentof his possessions. No oneshallbedeprivedof his possessions except in the public interest and subject to theconditionsprovided for by law and by thegeneralprinciplesofinternationallaw.".

IV.b Violation of the constitutional right to an effective remedy - see Article 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which reads as follows, "Everyonewhoserights and freedoms as set forth in thisConvention are violatedshallhaveaneffectiveremedybefore a nationalauthoritynotwithstandingthattheviolation has beencommittedby personsacting in anofficialcapacity.".

- Violation of Article 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: The cadastral authorities (legal successors of the geodesy centres) have not carried out the repeatedly requested correction of the error in the property registration for my parents' property. This duty is, however, set by the relevant law by which the cadastral authorities are bound - the previously effective Section 8, paragraph (1) letter a) of Act No. 344/1992 Coll, on the Cadastre of the Czech Republic, as amended, now Section 36, paragraph (1), letter a) of Act No. 256/2013 Coll., the Cadastre Act, as amended,

IV.c  Violation of the constitutionalright to a fair trial - see Article 6(1) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, first sentence, which reads: "In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or ofany criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fairand public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law."

- Violation of Article 6(1) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, first sentence: from the last century until now, I have not been providedeffective legal protection by the courts. Actually, no protection for my ownership rights acquired by inheritance have been provided to me at all. In the Court proceedings I have submitted evidences the following:

a) From 1987 to the present day, it has not been proven (in inheritance, administrative and court proceedings) that my parents would have ever been deprived of their ownership rights to the properties in question.

- On 06 July 1987 (the date of my father's death) and on 29 March 2001 (the date of my mother's death), I, as heir, acquired ownership rights to the properties in question on the basis of at that time effective Sec. 460 of the Act No. 40/1964 Coll., Civil Code, which reads as follows: "Inheritance is acquired on date of deceased person´s death".

b) From 1987 to the present, I have proven that the surveying centres (the legal predecessors of the cadastral offices) have carried out an "illegal administrative act" in the registration of the real estate of the parents' property by changing the ownership record- the annulment of this illegal administrative act is the only way of remedy: this ex officio duty was set in the previous legal regulation and is set in the current one.

V. Question to the reader of this article

Accepting the arguments of the opposite party would ad absurdum meanthat any changes in the real estate records as made by the surveying centers in this case for the parents' property can be made contrary by law and without knowledge and consent of the property owner and without any compensation.

For 36 years, I have been fruitlessly seeking for justice. Therefore, I am interested in obtaining information about an institution (mentioned in the readers' comment to this article) where justice can actually be sought and reached.

*****************************************

Part I - Part II - Part III - Part IV - Part V