As it have earlier been seen with, for example, "Tamilsagen" State employees are not always trustworthy,
Attorney Claus Bonnez
Give me one example of a patient who has taken action and filed a lawsuit
Highcourt Judge Hanne Kildal, East Jutland's Chief of Police Jørgen Illum.
I don't know whether you're going to interview the opposing side, e.g. the offiicial adminstration
In next episode of "Denmark increases the volume_2", we'll contact Aarhus District Court
Is Justice something that is being used selectively in Denmark - a country that used to have
It does not occur in weeklies of the judiciary,
Music by Niklas Aldén
Produced by
RED-tape-inc.com
Serious accusations from humanrights lawyer Claus Bonnez against the Danish state
So it is normal that Danish Law doesn't follow
Soundeffects
Special Thanks to:
That is very problematic!
The Snuff Street Journal editorial office will in subsequent editions make an interview with "Domstolstyrelsen"
The Ultimate Freedom: the Freedom of Crime
The only source of ammunition that the patients have access to
This is absurd, and a breach of the fundamental
Torben Thygesen and Michael Møller Hansen
Two of the District attorneys employees whom we know have processed such a case:
With law, thy must build the country
after the psychiatric law, and has been permitted to obtain expert impartial assistance
and possess the integrity and independence that would be expected in their position.
and the European Court of Human Rights, Article 5
but instead the courts emphasize the doctor whom hospitalized the patient
for an interview with one of its representatives District Court Judge Mette Helby Jensen,
human rights traditions we have in Danish Law
is the opposing side's information concerning themselves
or in other legal periodicals that I have knowledge of
patient an opportunity for a critical expert assessment
the European Court of Human Rights practice that allows the former
to discuss the punitive consequences of officials administrationally, violating the Danish constitution
traditions and reputation for respecting human rights.
whom are branding Denmark as the worlds happiest country
snuffstreetjournal.com presents
Denmark increases the volume_1
a documentary film about the new criminals
Danish Presidency of the EU
EU-Values?
Would you please present yourself?
I am Claus Bonnez and I'm a defence attorney,
and lawyer in other areas as well:
i.e. compulsory hospitalization,
"Retsplejlovens" Chapter 43a
The diagnosis is not my speciality
This, I'll leave for the medical specialists to explain
Do you know the renowned 'Rosenhan Study', and if you do, do you have an opinion about it?
I have heard about it
It was a study where some students were called in to participate in an experiment
They were here detected having a psyciatric diagnosis, despite the fact that they
didnt' suffer from any mental illness - that's what I know about the experiment
Could psychiatrists in America distinguish between madness and sanity?
He was called David Rosenhan and he devised a dramatic experiment
He assembled 8 people, including himself,
none of whom had ever had any psychiatric problems
Each person was then sent across the country to a specific mental hospital
At an agreed time they all presented themselves at that hospital,
and told the psychiatrist at duty they were hearing a voice in their head
that said the word “thud!"
That was the only lie they should tell,
othervise they were to behave and respond completely normally
And then what happened?
They were all diagnosed as insane, and admitted to the hospital
All of them?
All of them!
And were any of them insane?
No. There were nobody that could have judged these people as insane
But I told friends, I told my family: "I'll get out when its fine to get out...thats all!"
"I'll be there for a couple of days, and then I'll get out!"
Nobody knew that I would be there for 2 months!
Once admitted, all 8 fake patients acted completely normally
Yet the hospitals refused to release them,
and diagnosed 7 as suffering from schizophrenia and one from bi-polar disorder
They were all given powerful psychotropic drugs
They found that there was nothing they could do, to convince the doctors they were sane
And it quickly became clear that the only way out
would be to agree that they were insane and then pretend to be getting better
The only way out was to point out that they were correct.
They said I was insane, ”I am insane, but I'm getting better"
That was an affirmation of their view of me
In court, when I am called in to question a compulsory hospitalization;
which is from judicial human rights aspect
If the rules are respected, which under Danish law is critical,
because in praxis, the law generally doesn't permit a 'second opinion'
which is an alternative opinion beside the conclusions of the official assessment,
which you must bring to bear on a person to meet the legal criteria
of being compulsorily hospitalized in Denmark
Ok, does that often happen?
But... it's the rule!
Is it the rule that there is no possibilty for the patient to get get a 'second opinion'?
Yes, absolutely,
according to Danish psychiatric law, if you are compulsorily hospitalized, you have the right
to have your case tested in the Danish courts, to see if the hospitalization was entitled,
and this justice is elementary under Danish law,
according to the European Human Rights Convention Article 5
You have the right for this impartial justice,
and of course also because we are members of the Council of Europe
to respect the Danish constitution
So, when we have these cases,
in my opinion, they become nothing more than a sham
because you in reality have no other expert opinions, than the ones from the hospital even though
they are the ones, that have kept the individual in custody
And hereby we need a critical second opinion
that can eventually dispute the offcial authority's opinion
And it is understandable that as judges, courts and attorneys
we have no specialist psychiatric knowledge,
and I as an attorney don't know when a doctor says that an individual is insane
Very often you can't see whether the clients are normal or insane,
so this I can have no clue about, and neither does the judge,
and the attorney working on behalf of the hospital doesn't either
When we have this sort of case in the courts
we base the case on the documentation from the concerned hospital,
and it's not very surprising that they say their own decision was entitled
And therefore these cases are very subjective and hollow,
and in my conviction, conflicting with the European Human Rights Convention
This statement I base on concrete decisions
from the European Court of Human Rights:
that there should be an impartial body which make the subsequent assessment
if the concerned individual is or was insane,
therefore not the institution that has decided the enforced detention was originally justified
For me it is quite obvious,
and the European Court of Human Rights practice is not very surprising
but when you try and invoke it in Danish Law
it's like talking to deaf ears
Both County and High Courts. They basically do not care!
And now I've taken an action against with a concrete case in front of the Human Rights Court
Aha, on this basis?
On exactly this question where no
impartial body was allowed to make a subsequent assessment
Both County and High Courts focused in this specific case,
as in the many of the other cases I have taken,
exclusively on the testimony from the authorities,
the admitting doctor's expert assessments,
and the expert's assessment which maintained the forced hospitalization
And in my opinion,
it doesn't comply with the legal requirements as provided within
the European Human Rights Conventions Article 5
Hospital reported to "Arbejdstilsynet" (Official Work Inspectorate) - EPN.dk
Doctors uses illegal force every 2nd day - dr.dk
The boss to the staff: "Stop being caring towards the patients" - dagensmedicin.dk
"Arbejdstilsynet" returns streessplan from psychiatric hospital - stiften.dk
14 year old girl illegally fixated 286 times
Pharmaceutical companies gilders official control panel - borsen.dk
Psychiatric patients loosing 9 out of 10 court cases against the authorities
One publised case, was when the staff at Risskov pschyhiatric hospital,
in the suburbs of Aarhus, due to very heavy workloads,
filed a complaint to "Arbejdstilsynet" to get assistance
in facilitating a dialogue with the Direction of the Hospital; who had maintained
a rigid agenda from their singluar viewpoint
MADLY BUSY - I must do, I must do, I must do!!! Calme, calme - take it easy; take a pill
The staff reported:
"Jobs are not being done, the staff have to seriously weaken the quality and it affects the treatment and the work they do"
"...time for professional reflection and immersion is not present in the daily work"
"Time for professional reflection and immersion is not present in the daily work"
Yes, it is clear
You could say it's a bit of another problematic question that you raise,
because the question is: when you are admitted to a hospital,
if the working conditions is so poor
as described in the study from "Arbejdstilsynet",
it creates the risk that the staff of the hospitals can simply mis-diagnose the patient,
and it can have an impact, both on people who benefit from being under treatment at
the hospital - they may be too early written out and sent home -
while others who shouldn't be at the hospital for example: because they are not sick
remain at the hospital unwarranted
Which obviously is a serious problem
when people are in involuntarily custody
But, if so, one imagines that the hospital
had proper working conditions,
very professional and competent staff
it is still in violation with the rule of law
as the European Court of Human Rights interprete in Article 5,
that it can not be the same institution which subsequently
so to speak, deliver the opinions and the assessments which the court makes its decision upon
when a citizen claims in front of court, that a compulsory admission was unjustified
This of course is amplified by a poor working environment
Because of this, the validity of the medical staffs opinion is called into question
However, even if this not the case,
it remains problematic due to the
contradictory thought-process, present in a democratic states courtroom,
which is the fact that the defendant
has the opportunity to submit arguments in favor
as well as the opposing side, has this opportunity,
and that is the position of the patients when discharged