2.8. The ESO breaches of Human Rights in the case Palma

 

            Reference is made to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, Dec. 10, 1948, what was subscribed by the Governments of Germany, of Italy and of the other 7 Nations sustaining the ESO, i.e. actually on 2003: Belgium, Denmark, France, The Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom. Here are the Human Rights ESO violated in the case Palma and why.

 

ART. 1 "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience...".

 

Why did ESO infringe this article in the case Palma?

 

Because since the 16.1.1994 the ESO Head of Contracts and Procurement initiated an accentuated mobbing against his subaltern Dr. Palma, since he was living witness and conscience objector of his swindles, i.e. when the Head was granting undue DM 570.949 and DM 6.855.282 to a supplier, by manipulating procurement contracts, which were under Palma's exclusive delegated administration and responsibility.

The dignity and equal rights of Mr. Palma since then were no more a value at ESO: Mr. Palma was discriminated, relegated, punished (also by lack of an automatic increase of salary, despite of good references of other managers), then finally dismissed on 2.2.1995, simply because he showed to be endowed of the Human Rights of a reason and a conscience, in the interests of the ESO and of the tax-payers supporting the ESO.

ESO pushed Mr. Palma dignity totally around in the treatment it did to its Staff Member on 28.6.1995 and between the 29.6 and 30.7.1995 (See the true facts Palma/ESO of section 2.1.)

After and during eights years from those events, ESO (1995-2003) is still upholding the dishonesty inside of it, while trying to shelve anywhere and before of the Public Opinion the real facts and the whole case for a JUSTICE, as Mr. Palma would never be born for ESO (See also the report to some representatives of National Ministries of the ESO: section 2.7.)

 

ART. 2 "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms...without distinction of any kind, such as race...national or social origin..."

 

Why did ESO infringe this article in the case Palma?

 

Because ESO allowed since the very beginning of Palma’s job at ESO that some French colleagues and afterwards the Head of the Contracts and Procurement since 1994 could produce a real proved boycott of a due collaboration to work with him in the Department, simply due to the fact he showed honesty for the Organisation in above said questions and because he was the only ITALIAN having acquired a professional authority in a place (the ESO ADMINISTRATION) all dominated by French and Germans since the foundation of the Organisation (1973), therefore only aspired for a job by French and Germans. Mr. Palma was treated always like a foreign body in that environment.

Mr. Palma has been the only Italian since ever working at the ESO Contracts and Procurement: after him, his job was also divided between French and Germans.

 

ART. 3 "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person"

 

LIBERTY: ESO infringed this article on 28.6.1995 up to 30.7.2003, when physically depriving Mr. Palma (with no reason and with the force) of his liberty of movement and of coming again to ESO to fulfil his contractual obligation of work up to 1.2.1996!

ESO, as an extra-territorial institution in Germany, is surely not endowed of jails: nevertheless it condemned anyway and without any process Mr. Palma to a kind of proved Home Arrest (by its so called Special leave), after having treated him worse than an animal under the eyes of all ESO people on 28.6.1995. Upon a Palma's claim against that indecency, Mr. Brauneis (a Head at Personnel) also menaced Palma in written of further penalties, would he had still insisted to come to ESO to fulfil his job. This fact provoked a Palma's Appeal to the Director General (see the facts), whose Deputy Mr. Bachmann on 30.7.1995 finally allowed the end of that unjustified Home Arrest, by officially regretting that situation. However, since then and during eight years, NO ESO REMEDY (as a promised measure of favour for Mr. Palma against that deprivation of liberty) has been taken, although Mr. Bachmann (then passed away) had assured it in written! Any person in any democratic state has the right to a compensation for damages, should she/he suffer unjustly an acknowledged deprivation of liberty: but, there is actually no such a right for Mr. Palma.

 

SECURITY OF THE PERSON: ESO is infringing this right since the 1.9.1995, since it is depriving Mr. Palma of a due HEALTH INSURANCE of its sure competence for the Ex-Staff Member disabilities, although ESO itself and its Social Insurer (the CERN Pension Fund of Geneva) declared Mr. Palma as Severe Disabled Person for disability acquired at work and when working for ESO!

Mr. Palma's HEALTH and SECURITY OF HIS PERSON IS ALREADY SEVERELY COMPROMISED BY A EIGHT YEARS LACK OF A DUE HEALTH INSURANCE, WHAT IS ALSO MEDICALLY CONFIRMED ON 2003 BY RECENT EXPERT OPINIONS.

 

ART. 5 "No one shall be subjected to...inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment"

 

...and what is the treatment ESO reserved to Mr. Palma on 28.6.1995? Isn’t it INHUMAN and degrading one?

 

Since Mr. Palma had defended his rights before of a judicial internal Committee on 28.6.1995 morning (about 8,30-12,30, whereas this Board will give right and take a part for Mr. Palma by its report by end July 1995), ESO, i.e. in the person of its Director General Prof. Riccardo Giacconi, allowed the failing Head of Contracts and another Head to suddenly burst in Palma's office on 28.6.1995 h. 17,25: They surrounded Mr. Palma, deprived him of liberty, menaced him physically if not obeying and enjoined him five minutes to collect all his stuff and to leave forever the Organisation. They searched then all personal stuff and all personal correspondence, as Mr. Palma would be stealing at ESO instead of working. They confiscated any document, which could serve as evidence for a Tribunal against the ESO and against the managerial failures, what will also produce an expiration of 90 days terms of Tribunal for the initial Lawsuit against the Termination (some documents, as proof against the ESO, were only released on end Nov. 1995, despite of the intervention of a Lawyer since the 29.6.1995 paid by about all ESO employees by the Local Staff Association in defence of Mr. Palma).

Anyway, after that confiscation the two Heads, as acting policemen of the Organisation, surrounded him each one at a side and escorted him like a criminal, with shame under the eyes of everybody. On the end the Heads also menaced him to stay off forever!

It was just that degrading treatment that provoked ill humour and an uprising of feelings of all ESO Personnel against Mr. Giacconi, Director General, whereas the Staff Association hired immediately on own motion a lawyer against that indecent treatment of an employee!

Afterwards the Home Arrest...

ALL THIS ESO INHUMAN AND DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT SIMPLY FOR ONE FACT: BECAUSE MR. PALMA WAS A HONEST AND PROFESSIONAL PERSON IN HIS JOB AT THE ESO CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT!

 

ART. 6, 7 and 8 "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law"

                           "All are...entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law"

                           "Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals..."

 

ESO proves this infringement by its own law or, better, by the delinquent behaviour it is having since eight years for the JUSTICE that Mr. Palma is demanding.

In fact, while any person is recognized as such under any National Law for a Criminal Justice, this is not true and not at all valid for a Staff member or for an Ex-Staff Member of the ESO, as well as Mr. Palma is.

In fact, due to the lack of any Penal Justice for the Servants of the International Organisation, Mr. Palma is also not at all recognized as person before of any Penal National Tribunals, to sue directly the ESO, not for administrative issues but for criminal ones!

Every citizen of a democratic country of this world has the right to a Criminal Court, but not Mr. Palma!

Effective remedy does not exist in the case Palma, because actually there is no competent civil and penal national tribunal for the case.

Is this fact a proved Democracy of the ESO or is it a further proof of ESO breaches of Human Rights?

 

ART. 9 "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile"

 

Mr. Palma must not repeat here, what reported above to prove the ESO violation of this Human Right in matter of arbitrary arrest and Home detention.

It must only be reported that the "exile" ESO inflicted to Mr. Palma on 28.6.1995 did not finish on 30.7.1995, when Mr. Bachmann on behalf of the Director General assured him in written to favour remedies to that situation.

Instead of that, the physical "exile", to which Mr. Palma was condemned on 28.6.1995, continued up to 3.11.1999 upon directives of the Director General, Mr. Riccardo Giacconi to his new Head of Administration Mr. König (due to the death of Mr. Bachmann).

In fact Mr. Riccardo Giacconi, now Nobel Prize for Physics (Oct. 2002), had a very dirty conscience for the bestial treatment Mr. Palma had to suffer on 1995, so that he also disposed to refuse any Palma's presence at ESO to avoid any possible new upset of feelings in the Personnel against his authority, what was firstly provoked on 28-29.6.1995. In other words, any presence of Mr. Palma at ESO, even though under form of a short visit, annoyed him, for the effects that this could have produced in the feelings of the personnel, i.e. in all Palma's ex colleagues, who also paid (in vain) for a lawyer against that indecent situation. Here is a proved EXILE imposed against the Ex Staff member!

After the 28.6.1995 and Mr. Bachmann's death, Mr. Palma could therefore access ESO premises only on 3.11.1999 and only upon his open protest with posters before of ESO territory, i.e. only when Mrs. Cesarski became the new Director General at ESO and only when, upon that Palma's protest in the presence of the National Governants, she allowed that he could step again into ESO premises.

Before of that, there was only "exile", a breach of Human Right, for the ex employee, to keep off from ESO territory, what also hindered any dialogue with the Organisation and also compelled to 40 Administrative Lawsuits against the ESO

 

ART. 10 "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal..."

 

Why did ESO infringe this article in the case Palma?

 

See above, i.e. for lack of any suitable civil and Criminal Court and due to the existence only of an ADMINISTRATIVE Tribunal.

 

But is the only existing ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL of Geneva INDEPENDENT AND IMPARTIAL?

ABSOLUTELY NO!

In fact, by STATUTE OF THE ILO ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ITSELF, A PROCESS AND ALL TRIBUNAL EXPENSES CAN ONLY BE PAID BY THE E.S.O., then not at all by Mr. Palma.

This fact already gives to the reader the idea of the FAIR AND INDEPENDENT ONLY ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE THAT A PERSON LIKE MR. PALMA MAY EXPECT AT THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL VERSUS AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION!

 

This drama of the JUSTICE AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL became complicated by two factors:

 

- Mr. Riccardo Giacconi, as ESO Director General, i.e. as Director General of a primary source of occupation of Chilean people (since all observatories of ESO lie in Chile), would have been indirectly processed with the Lawsuits of Mr. Palma by an Institution (the Tribunal) of the I.L.O. (International Labour Organisation) which President by sheer coincidence is just a Chilean, Mr. Somavia;

 

- Moreover Mr. Riccardo Giacconi was in list to win a Nobel Prize (on 2002): how could Mr. Giacconi win a Nobel Prize, should his glory be damaged by THE GREAT MANAGERIAL SCANDAL AT ESO ON 1995 AND BY HIS SUPPORT GIVEN TO THE DISHONESTY IN CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT in all the time, when he was Director General between the 1994-1999?

Certainly, for everybody (inclusive the Representatives of the Governs of the States at ESO) was better to sacrifice the unknown but honest Mr. Palma and his Justice, rather than the glory of Giacconi and the good name of the Nations themselves, for all what of dishonesty happens at ESO!

Here is that Mr. Palma had to lose at any costs all Administrative Processes, even at cost OF BIASING THE JUDGES (what is duly proved), OF FALSITY NOTHING ELSE BUT FALSITY that ESO will produce and will be accepted by the Administrative Tribunal AGAINST ANY EVIDENCE, as if those judges were blind, deaf and paralytic, if not illiterate and ignorant, so to deny even the existence of any proof against Giacconi, even of evidences of Giacconi himself had signed!

 

But, is this report on the lack of independence and fairness of the ILO Administrative Tribunal only a Mr. Palma fantasy?

 

NO, BECAUSE IT IS PROVED BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE TRIBUNAL ITSELF AND BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE TRIBUNAL, THAT WERE CALLED TO EXPLAIN A DOCUMENTED SWINDLE MADE BY THE JUDGES TO FAVOUR ESO in the Judgement 1843 of 8.7.1999. WHILE THE REGISTRAR IMPLICITLY SUPPORTED PALMA AGAINST THAT FAILURE, THE PRESIDENT OF THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT ANSWER AT ALL ON THAT REAL SWINDLE OF ACTS OF TRIBUNAL!

ANY JUDGE, WHO FEELS OFFENDED BY A REPORT AGAINST THEIR UNFAIRNESS, TRY TO CLARIFY THEIR POSITIONS OR EVEN TO CONDEMN BY THEIR AUTHORITY A POSSIBLE DEFAMATION AGAINST THEM: BUT, THIS WAS NOT THE CASE OF THE CONCERNED JUDGES OF THE I.L.O. ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AGAINST MR. PALMA's “MOTION OF NO CONFIDENCE”!

 

Due to the evidences, is thus "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal..." according Art. 10 of the Chart of Human Rights applicable to the case Palma or is there a breach of Human Rights also in this article?

 

ART. 11 "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty..."

 

It is a documented and witnessed fact, in the case Palma, that ESO infringed his right in matter, when condemning and treating him like a criminal on 28.6.1995, under the eyes of everybody, although no guilty was previously and will never be proved for such a treatment.

 

ART. 12 "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence..."

ART. 13: "Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence..."

 

Why did ESO infringe these Human Rights?

The fact that ESO allowed the search and confiscation even of Personal correspondence on 28.6.1995 is proved and is known.

But it is not well known the fact that ESO also allowed an arbitrary interference in Palma's private life, family and home during the administrative processes the ex Staff Member produced against it.

 

This fact is proved and happened during the Administrative Lawsuit case AT-5-1312 of 27.7.1998.

In this circumstance the physical author of ESO concerned violations was Mrs. Elisabeth Kerk, an employee at the Personnel Department. This lady acted with proved methods of GESTAPO (the Nazi Police) and physically let spy Mr. Palma, his home, his privacy and his family, to ascertain what, when and where Mr. Palma and his family were doing, even whether or not Mr. Palma lived with his wife or was having relation with her!

 

Mr. Palma proved, reported and also protested these facts by the judges of that case at the Administrative Tribunal. Nevertheless, in spite of any fairness, they, once again, simply did not mention one word of this ESO proved infringement by their judgement 1950 of 17.7.2000!

 

Shortly, the question of the Administrative Lawsuit case AT-5-1312 of 27.7.1998 concerned only the Administrative aspects of a submission of Administrative Documents, that were the only Administrative Titles to produce as proof of the facts to get an ESO indemnity.

Instead of that, Mrs. Kerk transformed the case in a case of “nazi war” espionage.

On the end, even the CERTIFICATES THAT THE ADMINISTRATION OF ITALY OFFICIALLY ISSUED TO PROVE THE FACTS WERE CONSIDERED IMMATERIAL FOR THE LEGAL ISSUE, whereas MATERIAL, FOR BOTH ESO AND THE TRIBUNAL, REMAINED ONLY THE IMMATERIAL HYPOTHETICAL WORD THAT MRS. KERK EXPRESSED, ON THE OTHER HAND, ON AN UNDUE AND ILLEGAL INTERFERENCE WITH MR. PALMA's PRIVACY, FAMILY AND HOME. THE JUDGES BLESSED IMPLICITLY A CRIMINAL ESPIONAGE, MADE AGAINST ANY RULE OF LAW AND AGAINST ANY POSSIBLE JUDGE'S MANDATE, IN A PURE PRIVATE LIFE.

 

This would be another PENAL ISSUE TO SUMMON ESO AND DIRECTLY ITS MRS. KERK FOR A JUSTICE: BUT, ONCE AGAIN, THERE IS ACTUALLY NO CRIMINAL COURT FOR MR. PALMA, WHERE TO BRING DIRECTLY BEFORE OF THE PUBLIC OPINION ESO AND MRS. KERK TOO FOR THEIR CLEAR PENAL INFRINGEMENTS OF CONCERNED HUMAN RIGHTS!

 

ART. 17.2: "No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property..."

 

In the excited event of the 28.6.1995 ESO did not only confiscate internal, but also private correspondence, that were of Mr. Palma's property evidencing his personal contacts with Italian and Russian Astronomers. All physical property's items (books, maps, computer floppy disks, also with proves against ESO etc.), that could not be taken away in the five minutes granted by ESO to Palma on 28.6.1995 to leave, disappeared afterwards!

The deprivation of property was thus also linked to a deprivation of evidences for a Court of Justice!

 

ART. 18: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience..."

ART. 19: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion..."

 

Again: the only reason why Mr. Palma lost his job at ESO and received the inhuman treatment since 28.6.1995 up today, although already medically declared disabled person of the ESO, was only the fact that he thought as a professional rather than as a soldier, by blindly obeying to a dictatorship of dishonesty; his conscience prohibited him to be involved in relevant million swindles of his Head against the interests of the Organisation and his conscience prohibited him to ignore a REAL MANAGERIAL SCANDAL AND A REAL PLOT IN THE ORGANISATION against the Director General himself, what he also had to see by end July 1995 by firing on the spot Mr. Buschmeier (a Manager, his Deputy) and later on by terminating the contracts of Mr. Zeller and Mr. Brauneis (who were Head and Officer at the Personnel Department).

Mr. Riccardo Giacconi acted nevertheless against Palma's freedom of conscience, by shelving his managerial failures, by covering a real scandal at ESO and by upholding the dishonesty in the Organisation at Contracts and Procurement up today.

 

ART. 23: "Everyone has the right to work..."

 

By its behaviour also against a severe disabled person, ESO condemned Mr. Palma to unemployment, since no employer was accepting an aged person, despite of his highest qualifications, for charging the proper Health Insurance and the Social Security Schemes with disabilities only acquired when working at ESO. No Social System can accept the disability that a person has acquired under another Social System: this is a well-known UNIVERSAL FACT OF A SOCIAL JURISPRUDENCE.

All Palma's Appeals to ESO (Mr. Giacconi) for a job in quality of very disabled person of the ESO were all rejected.

Moreover also the Administrative Tribunal of Geneva, i.e. a Tribunal of the International Labour Organisation, in a clear protection to that inhuman behaviour of ESO and of Riccardo Giacconi (who had to win the Nobel prize), stated by its judgement 1665 of 10.7. 1997 and by its subsequent verdicts, that Mr. Palma had better to live of an EX-GRATIA PENSION OR OF A SOCIAL ASSISTANCE OF THE ESO SOCIAL INSURER RATHER THAN OF A LABOUR AT ESO. Unbelievable? Not at all, if one reads the judgments (e.g. the mentioned Nr. 1665 of 10.7.1997).

IN MR. PALMA'S CASE, INSTEAD OF THE HUMAN RIGHT TO A DEMANDED WORK SINCE THE 1995, THERE IS AN IMPOSED AND COMPULSORY SOCIAL ASSISTANCE!

 

ART. 24: "Everyone has the right to rest..."

 

By its mobbing the Head of Contracts and Procurement condemned Mr. Palma since the 16.1.1994 to work alone with an increased charge of activity before of old screens and without the help received up to that point by one or two assistants. This caused his no right to normal rest and intervals, as per other employees, moreover, unpaid overtime (due to the nature of the job), utmost stress, higher blood pressure and highest deterioration of myopia, that culminated on end for Mr. Palma on 11.5.1994 in a severe Health accident at the place of work before of his computer screen.

In consequence of that accident, Palma was declared severe disabled person of the ESO, but nevertheless dismissed without Rehabilitation Measures for above reported facts of DISHONESTY AND SCANDAL AT ESO!

 

ART. 25: "Everyone has the right...to medical care..."

 

ESO is infringing this Human Right since the 1.9.1995, by leaving Mr. Palma without any necessary Health Insurance of its exclusive competence for even caring the disabilities the ex Staff Member acquired when at ESO.

All Appeals in matter were ignored. On the end, the Appeals produced a discharge of liability from the ESO to its Social Insurer!

Afterwards all concerned Lawsuits at the Administrative Tribunal produced first an inversion of discharge of liability from the Social Insurer to ESO (“a passing of the ball”) and finally the ESO invented "mother of the lie", i.e. that "Mr. Palma turned down the ESO (decision) of Health Insurance (in his favour)". More DIHONEST THAN THAT ESO COULD NOT BE!

 

The judges of the Administrative Tribunal, as usual for protecting ESO, also accepted only that FALSITY OF THE FALSITY, endorsing in their judgments the pure ESO invention "Mr. Palma turned down the ESO Health Insurance". But they made a GREAT MISTAKE!

They forgot that, in the INTERNATIONAL JURISPRUDENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION AND BY STATUTE OF THE TRIBUNAL ITSELF, THE ONLY ORGANISM THAT CAN "TURN DOWN" ANYTHING AS A DECISION OF AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION IS ONLY AND EXCLUSIVELY THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF GENEVA ITSELF: AN INDIVIDUAL, LIKE MR. PALMA, IS IN NO WAY ENTITLED AND IN NO WAY EMPOWERED BY THE INTERNATIONAL JURISPRUDENCE TO TURN DOWN ANYTHING FROM THE ESO!

IN ADDITION OF AN ACCEPTANCE OF A PURE INVENTION, THERE IS THUS IN THE CASE A BREACH OF THE CONCERNED JUDGES, WHO OPENLY ACTED AGAINST THE STATUTE OF THE I.L.O. ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ITSELF!

 

Here is that Mr. Palma Human Right to medical care is hindered since eight years not only by ESO by its discharges of responsibilities and falsities, but also by the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organisation of Geneva against the dictate of its own Statute!

 

While for ESO it is about BREACH OF HUMAN RIGHTS, for the JUDGES, who accepted and signed that Falsity, it is a question of undergoing an inquest at the Administrative Tribunal itself or a question of an INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE against the ILO Administrative Tribunal of Geneva, what matters are actually in progress by middle of this year 2003!

 

ART. 25: "Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this declaration can be fully realized"

 

The infringement of this right in the case Palma does not belong to ESO directly this time, but to its supporting Nations of Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.

 

In fact, these nations forgot to put into existence an international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in the U.N. declaration could be fully realized for an International Staff member or Ex International Staff member like Mr. Palma.

Again, an International Staff Member or ex Staff member like Mr. Palma do not enjoy the rights of any other citizen of the Nations, supporting the ESO, due to:

- the absolute lack of any International Civil and Criminal Court;

- the impossibility to apply to any Civil and Criminal NATIONAL Court;

- the existence of a Tribunal of the I.L.O. that is only Administrative, in one degree of jurisdiction, moreover only paid by one party (the   Organisation) and therefore insufficient and biased to utmost unfairness;

- the full disregard that the Governmental Representatives of the Nations supporting the International Organisation made of any Palma’s report aimed to an Honesty, Transparency and Justice in the Organisations they support.

 

In fact, also the direct Appeals of Mr. Palma to the representatives of Governs against the dishonesty sustained at ESO and the crisis of the International Justice did not receive adequate consideration or were even ignored at all!

 

IN CONCLUSION, HEREBY ARE FINALLY PROVED THE E.S.O. BREACHES OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE CASE PALMA AND THE COMPLICITY THAT THE NATIONS OF BELGIUM, DENMARK, FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, THE NETHERLANDS, SWEDEN AND SWITZERLAND ARE GIVING TO E.S.O. IN CRIMINAL QUESTIONS AFFECTING DISHONESTY, NO TRANSPARENCY AND ITS PROVED INFRINGEMENTS IN SPITE OF THE CHART OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE UNITED NATIONS!

 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1