Complaint on Police procedure 28 October 2020

Slovene version

Subject: Invitation by Ptuj Police to Maribor Police Directorate

Reference: 2300-723/D3641901/K2304969/2020 (3F693-77)

I smoke cannabis for PTSD. A low endogenous cannabinoid syndrome has been demonstrated in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) victims.

It also helps me control my sleep, and assists me creatively.

Biomarkers for PTSD are a topic of some complexity:

A list of potential tests appears in Table 1.

The final biomarker mentioned is lowered endocannabinoids,and reference 64 refers to - in which AEA and 2-AG were assayed in addition to cortisol in survivors of the WTC collapse, so the patients were all exposed to similar experiences at the same time, increasing its usefulness.

"The effect of reduced 2-AG content in PTSD remained significant after controlling for the stress of exposure to the WTC collapse, gender, depression and alcohol abuse. There were no significant group differences for AEA or cortisol levels; however, across the whole sample AEA levels positively correlated with circulating cortisol, and AEA levels exhibited a negative relationship with the degree of intrusive symptoms within the PTSD sample. This report shows that PTSD is associated with a reduction in circulating levels of the eCB 2-AG. Given the role of 2-AG in the regulation of the stress response, these data support the hypothesis that deficient eCB signaling may be a component of the glucocorticoid dysregulation associated with PTSD. The negative association between AEA levels and intrusive symptoms is consistent with animal data indicating that reductions in AEA promote retention of aversive emotional memories."

My condition is the product of a series of earlier, some might say unlucky, life experiences before I came to Slovenia. In everyday terms PTSD in Ptuj means a jumpy, uncontrollable adrenocortical response, hypervigilance, hyperreactivity and a long reaction tail-off from negative stimuli such as home invasions by the town arsonist, being whacked in the sphenoid with a metal object as part of the chicken factory's Slovene language campaign, having my door kicked down by the junkie who wants to know why you told the Police he stole your phone, and the police arriving and taking all your substances and money on the basis of information to be discussed separately from and additionally to this complaint. I believe the decision-makers involved in this complaint must take me as they find me.

When the Ptuj police finished their house search on 28 September 2020 they wanted me to sign to give them permission to further invade my privacy by examining the contents of my phone, which I regard in the same category as a violation of the right to silence. With the assistance of the translator, I told the officer in charge Tamara Toš in no uncertain terms I would not sign.

On 6 October or shortly thereafter officers Toš and Lovrenc, per ZP-1 [corrected] Article 116 para. 1, returned to serve the invitation document in person, to attend for an examination of the phone at Maribor Police Directorate. They would or should have known that this was not possible without permission, or alternatively, a Court order. Perhaps they thought the trouble of the journey itself would tip the scales in their favour. Wishful thinking seems to be a persistent thread in this investigation, but I cannot yet expound on the other examples until the pre-trial.

The timing of the invitation to the Directorate coincided with the beginning of the October 27 ban on travel between municipalities. Although I finally found information in the press suggesting it was apparently permissible under the 13 exceptions this was less than authoritative and the language was opaque as usual, and open to an interpretation either way.

In short, I seemed to face a situation in which I could be fined for not going, but also fined for going, to Maribor. This, added to the prospect of close confinement with officers habitually dealing with all sorts of people, and presumably up to 48 hours of interrogation at close quarters, during what is supposed to be a health emergency, amounted to an extremely high risk for viral transmission in my view.

Firstly I had had no answer to this email:


Whatever we know or don't know about the risks of covid transmission, it cannot be denied that the risk of transmission from an unnecessary contact which is never zero.

What this episode demonstrates about human perception of relative risk is that, thanks to periodic bouts of prohibition mania, Ptuj Police are now capable of risking lives - chiefly those of their own colleagues - in pursuit of a war on giggling.

Unsure whether I would be fined for not going, or fined for travelling during the lockdown, I phoned the number on the invitation. The calls timed out without any answer on Monday 26 October 2020 at 16:16 and 16:32.

In search of an authoritative view I then went to Ptuj police station where I was apparently advised to attend at Maribor but without the officer on duty understanding the dilemma or my Slovene or English. I was recording everything by this point.

Stress continued to build as I prepared for the journey. I was up all night before leaving at 6.30 a.m., not the best time of day for me. I have had problems with my body clock since I was a teenager.

I arrived kitted up with mask and goggles along with all the other equipment I considered necessary for the interview where I planned to say nothing.

Tobacco's carcinogenicity was finally accepted in 1950


I arrived to find Directorate staff hanging around the entrance enjoying addictive recreational drugs. There was paraphernalia containing residues in a nearby flowerpot. LSD helped me give up tobacco in 1981.

The initial reception was neither welcoming or neutral. At no point between arrival and departure was I more than two meters from somebody. Slovene is a plosive language and I was glad of my goggles.

The Directorate was not expecting me, I had had no answers from any lawyers, and there was no translator. I was supposed to go away without proof I had arrived at all. Eventually I did get proof and an explanation of why the whole thing was a waste of time.

I feel I have cooperated to the limit as far as this process is concerned and received in return a false document which either knowingly or incompetently created a stressful situation, lasting weeks, culminating in a fruitless journey inimical to the aims of the covid measures, which was of no utility to any party to the proceedings - unless you include the increasingly obvious elephant in the room, namely that the instigators of this whole affair are xenophobes who want to punish me for being the one person in Ptuj with something to say about the Town Smell apart from "It's Ptuj", not being a drunk Slovenian guy in a bar, not being their bitch - very important to them this one - and of course having a big house and a sense of humour to match. A bed of roses contrasting with their melancholy zeitgeist. Love looks up through a telescope, jealousy looks down a microscope.

Further details will emerge at the hearing - if I get one - showing this action with the invitation fits a pattern of prejudice which gave rise to the warrant, which I also dispute.

The invitation is a document defined in Article 99 para. 5 of KZ-1.

Like everything else about marijuana prohibition, this latest drama sours relations between the public and the justice system and, possibly, between the Police and the Directorate.

The failure of the Police to provide a translator for the visit they were not expecting is understandable, but the grounds given for the journey are not. I put forward what I considered to be the only two possible explanations: that it was either a deliberate provocation using the powers of the system to inconvenience me, or that the perpetrators didn't know what they were doing. To either of these can be added the possibility that getting a court order didn't fit with their cunning plan, whatever it is.

No third alternative explanation was forthcoming from the Directorate, who tactfully described the Ptuj force's behaviour as "interesting" and readily admitted there were grounds for complaint. So I have no complaint with the Directorate.

But this farrago, combined with the absence of the banned and confiscated medicament, led to days of stomach upsets and a general malaise consistent with nervous exhaustion and depression. Each insult is added to the others. The well of my endrocinological system feels close to empty: in the vernacular, I'm too old for this shit.

Interestingly, remarks of the translator at the house search, when she finally arrived, made it clear she did not believe PTSD is a real disease, which will no doubt be a surprise to the authors of 5782 research papers used as a demonstration data set at It illustrates the typical invisibility of the syndrome to those without personal experience, even among the better educated. But I'm sure there are ex-cops who understand at a more visceral level.

Writing humour is a coping strategy and my kind of satire is something Slovenia, with its "insult" law, and unfunny language, will never understand. It doesn't lend to a perception from the outside that something is viscerally wrong with the author - and that's the point of it. It's all an act. Life isn't really all that funny. But it should be, and thanks to the right drugs, the right language, and the right reality, it is.

I could theorize that it's a counterbalance to one effect of PTSD, which could be described as a transfer of insults from the pool of mundane everyday stresses normally in the domain of the slow-stress coping mechanisms, to the domain of the fight-or-flight coping mechanism. Kidding around is a way to damp down the short fuse that has put many an ex-military guy behind bars or in front of the divorce court.

I couldn't have picked a worse place to do it, with (exceptions apply) its dour, nosey, intrusive, menacing crowd of jealous, unbalanced people looking for a fight. Their informant, a Mr Teodorovic, seems to be an outstanding representative, considering I've never even met him, and I have been in quarantine since 2012.

So I don't know if PTSD really exists in Slovenia or whether it is merely normality here: Ptuj Traumatic Stress Disorder. For me, at least, the worse it gets, the funnier it has to be. The peaceful surface of Slovenia does seem to be concealing a rather grisly undercurrent, a propensity to mutilate one's relatives, spouse, or self. Then there are those characteristically finger-pointing Slovenian suicide notes.

"In societies with a higher level of individualization and secularization, the influence  of kin and local community is much weaker. In such communities, suicidal individuals can't expect any vehement reaction of the family or the kin or even then, the relevance of such whispering is usually relatively low."

You'd better believe it. I can assure you that for me it is zero.

Regarding the presence or otherwise of PTSD, rather than the predictable accusations of malingering and exaggeration being added to Ptuj's other accusations and innuendos I would willingly submit to biochemical or psychometric testing. However this has not been an everyday survival priority, as I had a solution. The only other cures are avoidance and time.

As we have seen, biomarkers do exist, they may be unreliable or confounded by other factors. But assays are neither commonplace nor cheap, and - guess what - all my money went off in a cardboard box to Ptuj police station thanks to a trumped-up warrant, thanks to hostile intent.

Turning to the entire world as Ptuj knows it, "posttravmatska stresna motnja" has 93 Google results, and refinement of the search reveals that 54 of them contain the word "konoplja".

I don't want to blemish anyone's career, however from the victim's perspective this nonsense has taken on a life of its own. We all learn from our mistakes.

Recent events are little surprise, when "arguments about relative drug harms are occurring in an arcane manner, at times taking a quasi-religious character",falling%20off%2Funder%20the%20horse

I'm not interested in CBD any more than people are interested in decaffeinated coffee, or in alcohol-free beer:

Worldwide decaf is about 4% of all coffee sold.

Similarly, alcohol-free beer (various definitions) forms 3.44% of global beer market share.

The global non-alcoholic beer market was valued at roughly 18 billion U.S. dollars

Global beer revenue amounts to US$522,299m in 2020.,%2470.18%20are%20generated%20in%202020

From this it is common sense to conclude that relatively few people want drugs that barely do anything. CBD, decaf and alcohol-free beer have their roles and market niches, and the preference for doing research on CBD rather than THC and terpenes is not alone in forming part of the war against fun and freedom of ideas - consider Kha’ir Beg al-Mi’mar in 1511 and King Charles II in December 1675. But however sophisticated all the research seems -'s_coffee_experiment - it remains of little public interest and is contrary to the individual will, and whatever the grey hand of government wishes for, CBD will never replace the real thing.

Research has been slow in "discovering" positive effects it wasn't scientifically fashionable to find, and even more so in treatment of a syndrome it didn't - for a long time and for reasons of ligitation cost - want to exist. Both now exist, and of course did so before they had a name.

Contrast this with the panoply of "syndromes" that can be found in DSM-V and, as my defence will definitively show, in the rather pathetically self-serving anti-cannabis "literature" e.g. - to whose challenges I am completely open and ready to defend my choice.

Prohibition remains the huge, misguided mistake it always was, and now it's having babies.

For the admitted procedural error and out-of-pocket expenses I claim €10007,20.


Response from Ptuj State Prosecutor



11 November 2020 Amendment to Complaint following response from Ptuj State Prosecutor

Slovene version

District State Prosecutor's Office in Ptuj
Vodnikova 2
2250 Ptuj

Complaint against the police procedure Subject: Invitation of the Ptuj police to the Maribor Police Department
Reference: 2300-723 / D3641901 / K2304969 / 2020 (3F693-77)

Dear Sirs

Thank you for your letter 5 November 2020.

I reject your account for several reasons. Regarding police activities:

The terms you describe regarding the validity or otherwise of the “invitation” were not listed in the “invitation” itself.

Prior to your above letter, there was no indication that the “invitation” was anything other than a mandatory duty to attend, failure to comply with which could result in a fine in the event of non-compliance.

Contrary to your version, there was no attempt to explain that participation was not selected if a signed phone license was not granted.

Contrary to what you are proposing, no further communication or attempt was received regarding the invalidity of the “invitation” between its submission and my arrival at the Directorate.

From the delivery of the "invitation" to the arrival at the directorate, neither the telephone nor the permission to inspect was mentioned.

Nothing prevented the written delivery of a countermeasure, revocation or modification of the “invitation” or an explanation that there was no need to attend in any case. Because of the measures, I was at home all the time except for shopping. It is difficult to describe it as a remote or inaccessible location.

It is important that the employees of the directorate did not say anything about the attempts of the Ptuj police to annul, revoke or modify the "invitation".

The story of the attempts to revoke, annul or modify the "invitation" of the Ptuj police is obviously a post facto statement made in an attempt to respond to this statement.

The police could send a letter by registered mail explaining that without my signature, the “invitation” was just a joke. On the contrary, it was described when it was delivered in a tone that indicated that the designation of “invitation” was a joke to the contrary, in the sense that it was an offer I couldn’t refuse.

The Ptuj police could have put a note in the mailbox asking me to get in touch. I would do that. This would certainly have happened if what the police say about further attempts at contact were true.

I attended the Directorate only because of the threat of legal sanctions - for which you only hinted did not exist post factum. What other motive could I have for going there?

There was no reason to be there, and no reason to think I needed to be there.

The requirement to participate and the participation itself were novel  circumstances.

I must reiterate the potentially deadly consequences of unnecessary travel and contact during a pandemic, of which the police had to be particularly aware, taking special account of my age and circumstances. Of particular interest are windowless destinations, probably artificially ventilated, where I was sent, with an increased risk of transferring Covid19 from an aerosol or fomite, more reminiscent of a cruise ship than an office bathed in sunshine.

In contrast to covid19 and Premzl, marijuana is now considered a low-risk or no-risk pursuit.

Since my last letter, the number of U.S. states that have legalized recreational marijuana has increased to 15 and psychedelics have become the lowest police priority in Oregon and Washington DC and elsewhere Federal measures for decriminalization have been filed in the country whose drug laws Slovenia is transcribing.

Regarding the expected limitations of these measures, I am still convinced that a trip with a doctor would be quite disturbing, strange and monotonous for the patient and probably too long for the doctor.

Such torture is clearly an attempt by capitalism to cash in on a centralized drug monopoly, much like selling and exporting high-THC material to Australia independent-nodding-for -quality-mgcs-of cannabis strains-ng-b881118290z - the conclusions of the average user will not be greatly affected by special begging on behalf of the current Slovenian legal Janus.

Over the centuries, the establishment, although not particularly recently in Yugoslavia, has learned to leave people drinking coffee alone. And my position is that this should apply to marijuana and psychedelics in the same way. Now the bureaucracy must catch up.

In the ironic (especially for Ptuj) scenario of chicken and egg, psychedelics help people to distinguish between other dogmas - for example, the currently accepted narrative of recreational drugs - and what is actually happening now. Thus, psychedelics can save lives by keeping people safely at home or in the natural environment and away from bars, churches, gyms and other risky venues, further emphasizing the disproportionate nature of drug sanctions.

Short version - rooms with people in them are risky.


Long version - you are 20 times more likely to acquire infection from being indoors.


Role of air conditioning in transmission in a windowless environment


The misleading circumstances relied on in the original complaint have in no way been diminished by your response.

Police have made an unsubstantiated allegation alleging further attempts at communication over a three-week period. Counterfeiting of logs is a possibility that requires inspection. Due to a lack of credibility or provable evidence of communication attempts, the amount of my claim is increased by EUR 5000, plus postage. The total amount claimed is therefore EUR 15011.42.

In the broader legal field, no lawyer has responded. There is no list of lawyers on the BPP list. A translation of the BPP application form is not available. No translator or translation was present during the delivery of the "invitation", nor is it available during our exchange. [In Slovene version: This is another machine translation.]

Stores where I could scan your response for machine translation text processing are closed due to a virus. The prognosis for the pandemic and the reason why I would have to face such additional burdens are equally vague.

Therefore, and due to the long-standing antics of Ptuj with your language, I had to burden my acquaintances with requests for unpaid help in understanding your answer. Not surprisingly, they are not particularly interested in this, but I hope I have understood the essence of your position correctly. I’m hardly guilty if I’m not.

If you do not intend to use the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia in this statement, because it is Ptuj, I ask your office to at least facilitate electronic translation by copying your answers in plain text and not in pictures, to [email] This will not interfere with my rights in challenging other rights, the removal of which has not benefited the ordinary citizen, or me.

I am very grateful and regret the distortion of resources and the diversion of your personal time and attention to this trivial issue arising from the erroneous fusion of personal development with crime in defense of the paranoid Nixon regime. Thanks.


11 November 2020




Response from Interior Ministry Police Directorate





28 November 2020

Amendment to Complaint following response from Police Directorate

Slovene version

Amendment to Police Complaint and Claim of 29 October

Ptuj Reference 2300-723 / D3641901 / K2304969 / 2020 (3F693-77)
Ljubljana Reference 2600-569/2020/3 (142-04)

Certain character traits to which I attested in the above complaint have given cause for a broader assessment of the conduct of the investigation.

During the 28 September 2020 raid involving eleven strangers and a dog going through my house on 28 September 2020 in a hunt for pleasant and useful drugs, I could not simply excuse myself from the scene or make communications and was constantly surveilled. I was "deprived of liberty" in the sense of Article 4 of ZKP.

According to ZKP Article 148 paragraph 4, the Police must tell the suspect (in this case at the house search) before collecting information from him, which criminal offence he is suspected of, what is the basis for the suspicion against him, and must instruct him that he is not obliged to state anything or answer questions or, if he is to defend himself, he is not obliged to incriminate himself or his relatives or admit guilt, and that he has the right to a lawyer of his own choice, who may be present at his hearing, and that anything he confesses may be used against him at trial. The Police must also inform the suspect that he has the right to use his language and the rights referred to in Article 8 of that Act.

Instead of which, only the first - which criminal offence - was evident from the outset from my very limited understanding of the warrant, and the remainder were not evident until weeks after the eleven people and a dog had gone.

"Before collecting information" includes collecting my phone, which was confiscated at the outset.

Instead of the procedure in Article 148, the information was collected 1-2 hours before a lawyer or translator could be found. And the remaining obligations were never fulfilled at all.

Altogether, after the arrival of the translator and finally a lawyer, who stayed for around two hours, Ms Toš waited several hours for my so-called lawyer - herself ultimately suggested by the police themselves - to leave.

About four hours in, and with the lawyer out of the way, Ms Toš then asked me via the translator to provide the PIN code for my confiscated phone, immediately adding that if I did not provide the PIN, this would be an offence in itself.

Being devastated, worn down and exhausted by the events of the day up to this point, I believed her, without being able to think, under duress, and without any hope of adequate legal advice.

Her threat presumably refers to Article 219a paragraph 6 of the KZP, which states "If he refuses to do so, he may be punished or imprisoned in accordance with the provision of the second paragraph of Article 220 of this Act, unless he is [inter alia] a suspect".

Since I was a suspect, and therefore faced no prospect of punishment, the offence was moot, and therefore the statement of Ms Toš was misleading, or in a low-probability alternative explanation, there was a fault in the translation. The amount spoken was so short it could not have reasonably included such a caveat, and I expect if necessary the translator will confirm my version of events. The cops lied, about the law, and I offered up the PIN for no other reason than to avoid a punishment that does not exist.

In this we see in Ms Toš an identical modus operandi to the subsequent tale about the visit to Maribor, discussed in my two letters to the State Prosecutor of 29 October and 11 November 2020.

While there is a distinction to be made between an offence and a punishable offence, I cannot imagine anyone would willingly violate their own privacy, opening the data in question to unnecessary examination or interpretations which, in the context of this extremely biased and discriminatory enquiry, could disadvantage me as a defendant and prejudice my defence rights, including the right to silence.

This misleading information of Ms Toš and subsequent revelation of the true state of affairs further exacerbated the stress and anxiety precipitated by the entire operation - while at the same time the self-selected medicaments for dealing with such reactions had been removed.

I remind you of the personal circumstances and offer regarding medical investigation outlined in my letter to the State Prosecutor for Ptuj of 29 October 2020

In terms of guaranteed, translated meaning, NONE of the statements required by Article 148 were made before the phone was effectively seized. The Police tried to put the phone in legal limbo rather than immediately physically confiscating it.

So although I was prevented from touching the phone, under terms which were not explained, it wasn't actually taken away. Nor could these terms have been made clear beforehand as, to advantage themselves, the police had ensured there was no translator present.

The oddity of this situation suggests they were aware of the legal tension between arriving without a translator and confiscation of the phone, and that their situation was basically one of having to bluff. They were too busy maintaining this facade to provide the Article 148 warnings.

Says paragraph 5 of Art. 148: "Until the arrival of counsel, the performance of other investigative actions is also postponed, except for those that would be dangerous to delay." The exact meaning of dangerous was taken to include the use of the means needed to summon counsel, namely the phone, allowing the Police themselves to choose a lawyer - an ex-policeman - who arrived, merely to summon an English speaking colleague and then disappear.

The dangers of such a ridiculous scene would appear to be entirely damaging to the client or public good, rather than that of the Police who, lest we forget, were fully aware of the language issue before they arrived, but chose to ignore it for psychological and economic reasons.

The statement of Ms Toš referring to Article 219a paragraph 6 was made at a time I had not given permission to examine the phone, nor had a court order to do so been obtained. The statement was therefore dishonest and misplaced, and an attempt to trick me out of my legal rights, the loss of which I obviously regret, in hindsight and with the knowledge I have now.

Moreover per paragraph 7 of 219a "The investigation must be carried out in such a way as to infringe as little as possible the rights of persons other than suspects or accused persons, and to protect the confidentiality or confidentiality of information and not to cause disproportionate damage" - revealing the PIN for the phone obviously does nothing but diminish this aim, but could only embarrass or demean me in the eyes of the contacts therein, whether for reasons real or perceived.

Both violations occurred without the presence of a lawyer. The lawyer came and went in the middle and was very little use. It seems incomprehensible that the second and more egregious of the two anomalies could have been left so late for any other reason than to evade legal assistance to me in responding to the PIN code request. Everyone but Ms Toš and the translator had gone, allowing the suggestion that I only had to give in to one more thing and it would all be over.

How does the action of 28 September compare to the order of priorities suggested by the law?

Instead of 1. translation and representation rights, 2. confiscation, 3, signature, 4, PIN request, the order of events preferred by Ptuj Police was 1. confiscation, 2. translation rights, 3. representation rights, 4. more confiscation, 5. representation rights gone home, 6. PIN request (granted under false pretences), 7. signature request (refused).

Police cautions are an elementary but vital procedure known to anyone who has watched TV. People who don't speak Slovene can hardly be a novelty either. I don't think these can be classed as minor anomalies, particularly in the context of the subsequent events for which claims have already been submitted.

I even feel a bit sorry for Ms Toš and wonder if she has been set up by her more experienced male underlings, to take the heat and the paperwork for this unnecessary but ex officio interference in the private life of an already deeply marginalised non-citizen.

Due to the omission in the first instance and commission in the second instance, I therefore wish to issue a claim against Ptuj Police for a further €7500 and €10000, relating to dereliction of duties under Articles 148 and 219a respectively, and expenses of €2.11 amounting to an additional total claim of €17502.11, and together with the claim outlined on 29 October and 11 November a grand total of €32,513.53.

Because they relate to a pattern of misbehaviour these claims are contiguous and combined with those described on 29 October and 11 November 2020. Furthermore there can be no time limit on Constitutional rights. I must remind you that there are currently no legal representatives or translators available for foreigners in Slovenia without money.

I take no joy in the extra work this has generated. Contrary to what you might expect I don't consider myself an anarchist and I'm not anti-police. That would be ridiculous. Obviously the situation I find myself in doesn't make it easy to remain rational about that, and perhaps we can all agree that cannabis prohibition promotes vigilantism, and does more to damage police-public relations than anything else in the world.

Finally it does not now seem melodramatic to assume that the summons to Maribor was intended to get me out of the house in order for the Police to enter and either remove or plant electronic surveillance resources. I'll be looking at this aspect in the weeks to come, as we celebrate the Maribor Supreme Court's discovery in RS v Jašar that weed isn't such a bad thing, and that proportionality in police investigations is a good thing. So far the only person damaged is,

Yours truly

The following invitation a hearing into the complaint against Ptuj Police on 12 January 2021 arrived. The venue? Ptuj Police Station.

The following letter to the Ombudsman describes what happened between the arrival of the invitation and 31 December 2020.

It was copied to  the CSD, Pravo za Vse, the State Prosecutor for Ptuj and various experts supposedly interested in Slovenian culture and language.


31 December 2020

Human Rights Ombudsman
Dunajska 56
1000 Ljubljana

Pritožba na policijski postopek Zadeva: Povabilo policije Ptuj na PU Maribor Referenca: 2300-723 / D3641901 / K2304969 / 2020 (3F693-77)

Rok za intervencijo 17.00 11. januar 2021
Deadline for intervention 1700hrs 11 January 2021

Spodaj sledi nekakšen slovenski prevod
Some kind of Slovene translation follows below

In recognition of Ptuj's efforts on behalf of the official language of Slovenia
Kot priznanje prizadevanjem Ptuja v imenu uradnega jezika Slovenije


Slovenia has of course joined the EU and UN on the basis of respect for the rule of law and human rights. In practice, the general rule about human rights for officialdom in Slovenia seems to be that the more you need them, the faster they run. Let's take a look.

The following is from my enquiry to Pravo za Vse, and you will see the response.


I'm told by the CSD you have a legal aid surgery every first and third Wednesday of the month.

Probably this is cancelled, but if not this would put the next one on 6 January 2021, only six days before the scheduled hearing of my complaint about police procedure, comically to be held at Ptuj police station.

Something needs to be done to assert my rights under Constitution Article 14, to provide a translator, legal assistance, to request postponement of this hearing and its transfer to a neutral venue.

The history of the case can be found at

Basically the Police are of the view that if I can't speak Slovene I should lose at every turn. Here's my take on how that's coming along:

Otherwise I believe I have a very solid legal claim meeting all four criteria for compensation. I would say I am generally more aware of my Constitutional and legal rights than native speakers of Slovene in Ptuj. I wonder how that happened?

Now I need those theoretical rights turning into reality and not blocked by Ptuj's weaponisation of Slovene. I'm rather bashed up. I'm in receipt of social assistance and a permanent resident in Ptuj.

Lepo praznik!

So to summarise:

No lawyer (I have contacted about 25 so far) even replied, among them:,,,,,,,,,,,,

By phone the CSD denied there could be money for a translator, who referred me to Pravo za Vse.

Pravo za Vse recommended I get a lawyer, also referring me to the Ombudsman.

Being directed by the CSD to depend on volunteer law students to obtain these rights does not provide the rights described.

Contrary to the PZV's excuse, the problems are not "wide" but quite specific as enumerated, particularly as they relate to the countdown to 12 January.

Although the background to individual poverty is supposedly irrelevant to the alleged rights, I have no money for rights not because of a lack of saleable skills but because Ptuj is a rubbish hick anti-everything-except-drinking redneck town where prejudice, ignorance and fearmongering thrive, so obviously an ideal playground for anti-cannabis laws. And the Ptuj air quality requires constant mood-lifting additives.

The non-existent lawyer the CSD-recommended PZV recommends needs to be on the BPP list (no list is available of these).

The lawyer needs to speak English as there is no translator.

I only want a lawyer to assist with, not conduct, the case. Because otherwise it will be rubbish as Slovenia's lawyers, like every other Slovenian business, are about as customer-centric as Kim Jong-Un. Your language and procedure, not legal rights per se, are the obstacles.

Ergo the services it is being recommended I obtain, in defence of the rights I am supposed to have, do not exist in Slovenia at this time. If your job is telling people to go somewhere else it is a bullshit job which might as well not exist.

The proposed venue for the Police complaint hearing on 12 January is non-neutral.

There is no indication that the Police intend to provide a translator at the hearing.

It is not clear if the Police Directorate is running the hearing, or if or how its activities are separated from the operational arm of the Ptuj Police and the substantive case from whence the procedural complaint arises.

If the solution to the lawyer/translator problem is BPP, I do not know how to fill in the BPP form as I do not have a lawyer or a translator, whilst I do theoretically qualify for financial assistance.

No lawyer wants to work on BPP so the rights are essentially worthless.

Obviously, no one in Ptuj wants me to have anything, as I have fought the Town Smell, which might encourage more foreigners.

Pravo za Vse say they aren't going to answer any questions until after 2 January, and estimate that an answer will take 14 days, which is obviously later than 12 January. And they aren't going to answer any difficult ones. Which is a not very subtle code for tough shit.

Meanwhile, as the UN discovered on 2 December 2020 after 60 years of human
victimisation including by Slovenia, cannabis turns out not to be heroin and Slovenia and its predecessor's basis for fining its users and throwing them in jail was all a silly mistake that any international scientifically-supported treaty organisation could have avoided - if only the science hadn't been prevented by making it illegal. Although everybody involved at the sharp end knew that all along. However, we're still waiting for the science on the toxicity of potatoes, yet potatoes have not been banned in the meantime as they are not associated with non-white people or jazz. It's a double standard if you ask me.

And also in various places that are not too busy getting drunk, slaughtering their partners and relatives and committing suicide, cannabis is now treated like aspirin or coffee. Were such circumstances paralleled in less sophisticated parts of the world, less of this would be happening here, as people would find safer, more sensible ways to relax. Compensation please!

The rights all look great on paper but the reality is pathetic. While Slovenia does not appear to be short of lawyers, perhaps those who claim to speak English merely had someone else take their exam, or otherwise bought their passes, and are frightened of exposure on the battlefield, especially for such scant rewards.

Therefore Slovenia's plan is as follows: Having made it impossible to learn the language to any significant degree, the hearing will use the language issue to dismiss the complaint, which will not then be able to be reinstituted due to time limits, and lacking arguments not available due to the non-existence of adequate representation in Slovenia I will lose the possibility of compensation because of the lack of lawyers who respond to enquiries, of BPP lawyers, and of money for a translator.

And no, my friends aren't going to do it.

All of the above additionally applies to the substantive case itself, from which the complaint arises.

Lacking other solutions, I invite the Police Directorate to suspend the hearing until a satisfactory and fair set of circumstances supervenes.

See you in the ECHR then?

I have put this in a signed letter too, addressed to the Ombudsman.

-------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Portal Pravo za VSE Vam odgovarja <>
Date: Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 11:20 AM
Subject: Answer
To: <>

due to the coronavirus and epidemic situation, we decided to close all our "legal clinics" for time being. Unfortunately, right now we don't organize any other oral events or meetings, but we are always up to answer some specific questions that occur. Evaluating all the informations you provided, we strongly advise you to seek professional help - a lawyer, since the problem is wide and not that specific at all. Our "mission" is to provide the first legal insight and not to evaluate such broad legal issues. Regarding the issue, we also advise you to seek help from the Human Rights Ombudsman - more available at:

Pravo za vse Team

And now here's a rubbish translation of the above into Slovene by multi-billion-dollar corporation Google, who the CSD advise should go and learn Slovene at the "People's University of Ptuj" (former headmistress Klavdija Markež -official history here:ž) - PUP only get EU money for teaching Slovene to Italian, Hungarian, and Serbo-Croat speaking folk.

By the way my application at CSD for translator money is still an open case. They phoned so there is no record of this advice to ask PZV, which as we have seen turns out not to be za vse at all. They were more concerned that I should email them to close my enquiry. See email to Wed, Dec 16, 1:08 PM

In zdaj je tukaj smeten prevod zgoraj navedenega v slovenščino več milijard dolarjev vredne korporacije Google, ki bi ji CSD svetoval, naj se uči slovenščino na "Ljudski univerzi Ptuj" (nekdanja ravnateljica Klavdija Markež - uradna zgodovina tukaj:ž) - PUP dobi denar EU samo za poučevanje slovenščine v italijanščini, madžarščini in srbohrvaškem jeziku.

Mimogrede, moja prošnja za prevajalski denar pri CSD je še vedno odprt primer. Telefonirali so, zato ni nobenega zapisa o tem nasvetu, da bi vprašali PZV, kar se je, kot smo videli, izkazalo, da sploh ni za vse. Bolj so bili zaskrbljeni, da jim pošljem po e-pošti, da zaključijo poizvedbo. Glej e-pošto na sreda, 16. decembra, 13:08

Dragi Slovenski kulturni opazovalci,

Slovenija se je seveda pridružila EU in OZN na podlagi spoštovanja pravne države in človekovih pravic. V praksi se zdi splošno pravilo o človekovih pravicah za uradništvo takšno v Sloveniji, da bolj ko jih potrebujete, hitreje tečejo. Oglejmo si.

Sledi moje povpraševanje za Pravo za Vse in videli boste odgovor.

Na CSD so mi povedali, da imate vsako prvo in tretjo sredo v mesecu operacijo pravne pomoči.

Verjetno je to preklicano, če pa ne, bi to naslednje postavilo 6. januarja 2021, le šest dni pred načrtovanim zaslišanjem moje pritožbe o policijskem postopku, ki bi bilo komično na policijski postaji Ptuj.

Nekaj je treba storiti za uveljavljanje mojih pravic po 14. členu ustave, zagotoviti prevajalca, pravno pomoč in zahtevati preložitev te obravnave in njen prenos na nevtralno prizorišče.

Zgodovino primera lahko najdete na

V bistvu policija meni, da če ne znam slovensko, moram izgubiti na vsakem koraku. Tukaj je moje mnenje o tem, kako se to dogaja:

Sicer menim, da imam zelo trden pravni zahtevek, ki izpolnjuje vsa štiri merila za odškodnino. Rekel bi, da se svojih ustavnih in zakonskih pravic na splošno bolje zavedam kot domači govorci slovenščine na Ptuju. Zanima me, kako se je to zgodilo?

Zdaj rabim te teoretične pravice, ki se spreminjajo v resničnost in jih ne ovira ptujsko orožništvo slovenščine. Precej sem raztresen. Prejemam socialno pomoč in imam stalno prebivališče na Ptuju.

... Lepo praznik!

Če povzamem:
Noben odvetnik (do zdaj sem poklical približno 25) niti ni odgovoril, med njimi:,,,,,,,,,,,,

Od CSD ni denarja za prevajalca, ki me je napotil na Pravo za Vse.

Pravo za Vse je priporočilo, da poiščem odvetnika, ki me napoti tudi k varuhu človekovih pravic.

Če nas CSD napoti, da je odvisen od študentov prava prostovoljcev, da pridobijo te pravice, ne zagotavlja opisanih pravic.

V nasprotju z izgovorom PZV težave niso "široke", ampak povsem specifične, kot so naštete, zlasti ker se nanašajo na odštevanje do 12. januarja.

Čeprav naj bi bilo ozadje revščine posameznikov za domnevne pravice nepomembno, nimam denarja za pravice ne zaradi pomanjkanja prodajnih veščin, ampak zato, ker je Ptuj smetišče, ki preprečuje vse, razen pitja, rdeče mesto, v katerem so predsodki, nevednost in strah. uspevajo, zato je očitno idealno igrišče za zakone proti konoplji. Kakovost zraka na Ptuju zahteva stalne dodatke za dvig razpoloženja.

Neobstoječi odvetnik, ki ga priporoča PZV, ki ga priporoča CSD, mora biti na seznamu BPP (teh ni na voljo).

Odvetnik mora govoriti angleško, ker ni prevajalca.

Želim samo, da odvetnik pomaga in ne vodi zadeve. Ker drugače bo to smeti, saj so slovenski odvetniki, tako kot vsako drugo slovensko podjetje, približno toliko usmerjeni na kupca kot Kim Jong-Un.
Ovire predstavljajo vaš jezik in postopek in ne zakonske pravice same po sebi.

Ergo storitev, ki jih priporočam, da jih dobim, za zaščito pravic, ki naj bi jih imel, trenutno v Sloveniji ne obstajajo. Če vaša služba ljudem nalaga, naj gredo nekam drugam, je to sranje, ki morda tudi ne obstaja.

Predlagano prizorišče policijske pritožbe 12. januarja ni nevtralno.

Nič ne kaže na to, da namerava policija na obravnavi zagotoviti prevajalca.

Ni jasno, ali policijska uprava vodi zaslišanje ali pa, ali ali kako so njene dejavnosti ločene od operativnega dela policije Ptuj in vsebinskega primera, od kod izhaja procesna pritožba.

Če je rešitev težave z odvetnikom / prevajalcem BPP, ne vem, kako izpolniti obrazec BPP, saj nimam odvetnika ali prevajalca, čeprav teoretično izpolnjujem pogoje za finančno pomoč.

Noben odvetnik ne želi delati na BPP, zato so pravice v bistvu ničvredne.

Očitno nihče na Ptuju ne želi, da bi imel kaj, saj sem se boril z vonjem mesta, ki bi lahko spodbudil več tujcev.

Pravo za Vse pravi, da bodo na vprašanja odgovorili šele po 2. januarju in ocenjujejo, da bo odgovor trajal 14 dni, kar je očitno kasneje kot 12. januarja. In na nobenega težkega ne bodo odgovorili. Kar ni zelo prefinjena koda za težka sranja.

Medtem, kot so OZN 2. decembra 2020 odkrili po 60 letih človekove viktimizacije, vključno s Slovenijo, se je izkazalo, da konoplja ni heroin, Slovenija pa je bila podlaga za kaznovanje uporabnikov in njihovo metanje v zapor neumna napaka, da je kateri koli mednarodni znanstveno podprti pogodbeni organizaciji bi se lahko izognili - če le ne bi preprečili, da bi znanost postala nezakonita.

Čeprav so vsi vpleteni na ostrem koncu to ves čas vedeli. Vendar še vedno čakamo na znanost o toksičnosti krompirja, vendar krompir medtem še ni prepovedan, saj ni povezan z nebelci ali jazzom. Če vprašate mene, je to dvojni standard.

In tudi na različnih krajih, ki niso preveč zaposleni s pijančevanjem, zakolom svojih partnerjev in sorodnikov ter samomori, se konoplja zdaj obravnava kot aspirin ali kava. Če bi bile takšne okoliščine vzporedne v manj sofisticiranih delih sveta, bi se tu dogajalo manj, saj bi ljudje našli varnejše in bolj smiselne načine za sprostitev. Nadomestilo prosim!

Vse pravice so videti na papirju, resničnost pa je žalostna. Čeprav se zdi, da v Sloveniji ne primanjkuje pravnikov, so morda tisti, ki trdijo, da govorijo angleško, zgolj imeli, da je nekdo drug opravljal izpit ali kako drugače kupil njihove vozovnice, in se bojijo izpostavljenosti na bojišču, še posebej za tako pičle nagrade.

Zato je slovenski načrt naslednji: Ker je zaslišanje onemogočilo učenje jezika v pomembni meri, bo zaslišanje z jezikovnim vprašanjem zavrnilo pritožbo, ki je zaradi časovnih omejitev potem ne bo mogoče obnoviti in brez na voljo zaradi neobstoja ustreznega zastopanja v Sloveniji, bom izgubil možnost odškodnine zaradi pomanjkanja odvetnikov, ki se odzivajo na poizvedbe, odvetnikov BPP in denarja za prevajalca.

In ne, moji prijatelji tega ne bodo storili.

Vse navedeno dodatno velja tudi za sam materialni primer, iz katerega izhaja pritožba.

Če drugih rešitev ni, vabim policijsko upravo, da zaslišanje ustavi, dokler ne prevlada zadovoljiv in pošten splet okoliščin.

Se vidimo potem v EKČP?

Tudi to sem dal v podpisano pismo, naslovljeno na varuha človekovih pravic.

-------- Posredovano sporočilo ---------
Od: Portal Pravo za VSE Vam odgovarja <>
Datum: ponedeljek, 28. december 2020, ob 11.20
Zadeva: Odgovor
Za: <>

zaradi koronavirusne in epidemične situacije smo se odločili, da zaenkrat zapremo vse svoje "pravne klinike". Na žalost trenutno ne organiziramo nobenih drugih ustnih dogodkov ali srečanj, vendar smo vedno pripravljeni odgovoriti na določena vprašanja, ki se pojavijo. Glede na vse informacije, ki ste jih posredovali, vam toplo priporočamo, da poiščete strokovno pomoč - odvetnika, saj je težava široka in sploh ni tako specifična. Naše "poslanstvo" je zagotoviti prvi pravni vpogled in ne ocenjevati tako širokih pravnih vprašanj. Glede vprašanja vam svetujemo tudi, da poiščete pomoč pri varuhu človekovih pravic - več na voljo na:
Lep pozdrav, ekipa Pravo za vse

Naturally, if anyone can genuinely help with my many victories, they will be entitled to payment of costs. However, you will be aware that expressing complex ideas, such as those which can lead to victory against the authorities, is not easy in Slovene, and especially for native speakers.

Lep pozdrav


Meanwhile, near Ptuj, the third triple murder of the year in Slovenia took place on Christmas Day, in traditional circumstances.


To make sure I have exhausted all other remedies, I also wrote again to the Ptuj State Prosecutor, as follows:


District State Prosecutor's Office in Ptuj
Vodnikova 2
2250 Ptuj

31 December 2020

I am writing to institute a complaint against the Police for the following reason.
An invitation dated 8 December 2020 to a hearing about a complaint against Ptuj Police, reference: 2300-723/D3641901/K2304969/2020 (3F693-77) on 12 January 2021 gives Ptuj Police Station as the proposed venue.

Does it really need to be explained that Ptuj Police Station is not a neutral venue for a complaint about Ptuj Police? It isn't.

Please postpone the hearing and arrange a neutral venue or proceed with this as a separate complaint.

Additionally, please clarify whether the hearing falls under the definition of "investigative and other judicial acts" in the sense of Article 8 of ZKP.

It is a sad time for Ptuj of course, especially as, apparently more from weary predictability than personal involvement in the case, psychiatrist Peter Umek has stated that the perpetrator of the Christmas atrocity is probably an alcoholic.

I have to say no cannabis-associated triple murders in Ptuj or the UK come to mind although there do seem to be a few examples in gun-toting America, principally related to the illegality of cannabis though, rather than its effects per se. Although Ptuj's talent for creating destruction out of anything should not be underestimated.

I couldn't find three triple murders in a jurisdiction of two million in a single year anywhere in America.

None of which is to suggest that legal drug users can't make a fight out of nothing.

In which regard the following should be of more practical use in your area, assuming Slovenia plans to continue with the legal drugs.

Raman spectroscopy allows for fast determination of methanol in violent Haložan urine and also bottled wine and is available in Slovenia

Since poisoning is technically an offence and methanol poisoning is relatively hard to detect and not necessarily due to deliberate adulteration or counterfeiting, but also to woody grape varieties and wood in traditional ferments, this would seem to be an important presumptive test in violent drunk offenders and their drug of no choice.

After all, Ptuj would prosecute somewhat differently for socially unacceptable dancing if the offender had been sold ergot-containing bread.

However methanol is a problem even for non-methanol drinkers as, unlike Dr Krek's CBD that turns into THC, ethanol that turns into methanol really exists.

And as if we didn't already know that drinkers are unstable idiots who drift easily into fantastical beliefs, science has revealed that words reminding people of alcohol alter their interpretation of situations where another person's intentions are unclear.

Even without alcohol, brief prior exposure to alcohol-related words makes aggressive thoughts more accessible, colouring interpretation of an ambiguous event and prompting an aggressive response.

As there is no scientific reason to think this applies any less to Ptuj vocabularies, reducing aggression demands that limitations be placed on the salience and availabilty - in the media, advertising, labelling and so forth - of words such as "vino", "pivo", and - due to its long association with violent death - "zakrament".

Violent vino and other alcoholic goods that must be sold could be adorned, like cigarettes, with compensatory messages such as "killer juice", "liver rot, lover not" and "divorce drink" to offset this violence-triggering effect, creating many jobs in industries dedicated to font size lobbying and to selectively portraying alcohol's consequences as a social benefit upon which you should dispose of your income, instead of kaneh-bosm.

Anyhow I hope that's constructive and at least partly useful. I'm trying, strenuously, not to equate liking less dangerous alternatives with hating the Police, but there are limits to judicial attacks. I mean if they think this is alright who knows what they might do, especially if tempted to drink away the stress of dealing with murderous drunks?

So unless my hearing can be relocated to a neutral and non-intimidating venue I'd like to officially register the above complaint, where Articles 22 and 23 of the Constitution of RS apply.

Best wishes for the new statistical year!

09 January 2021 0901


Regarding translation costs in administrative proceedings against the police on the 12th January, I am enquiring if costs of translation for an unemployed UK national with permanent residence will be borne by the state under ZUP 122 (paragraphs 6 and 7) and 62 (paragraph 7). Do reciprocal arrangements exist between Slovenia and the UK?

Although it is highly unlikely English would fail so spectacularly at educating incomers about itself in the reverse situation, I would certainly hope a Slovene-only speaker without money would be able to exert legal rights concerning police process in the UK. Should this prove not to be the case, I wish to enter a claim for discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution and statutory rights for unequal treatment based on nationality and language, and postpone the present proceedings pending a result in that dispute.

I live in Ptuj. Here's the background:

Glede stroškov prevajanja v upravnem postopku proti policiji 12. januar sprašujem, ali bo stroške prevajanja za brezposelnega državljana Združenega kraljestva s stalnim prebivališčem nosila država v skladu z ZUP 122 (6. in 7. odstavek) in 62 (7. odstavek). Ali med Slovenijo in Združenim kraljestvom obstajajo vzajemni dogovori?

Čeprav je zelo malo verjetno, da bi angleščina tako spektakularno propadla pri izobraževanju prihajajočih o sebi v obratni situaciji, gotovo bi upal, da bi govornik, ki govori samo v slovenščini, brez denarja, lahko uveljavljal zakonske pravice glede policijskega postopka v Veliki Britaniji. Če se izkaže, da to ne drži, želim vložiti zahtevek za diskriminacijo po 14. členu Ustave in zakonske pravice do neenakega obravnavanja na podlagi državljanstva in jezika ter preložiti sedanji postopek, dokler ne pride do rezultata v tem sporu.

Živim na Ptuju. Tu je ozadje:

Lep pozdrav