Brief description of documents confirming human rights violations by a representative of the Minister of the Interior of Slovenia:
In appeal protocol No. 2600-2/2024/15, dated May 10, 2024, filed with the Nova Gorica police, a representative of the Slovenian Minister of the Interior assured that all my complaints and statements would be forwarded to the specialized prosecutor's office for further investigation (see file 9). This assurance served as the basis for my signature on the protocol.
However, as it became known from the letter of the Supreme Prosecutor's Office VDT-Tu-6-4/47/2024/4 (file 16), the representative of the Minister of Internal Affairs sent a different decision to the specialized prosecutor's office (file 9.1), which led to the rejection of my documents.
I filed a complaint with the Supreme Prosecutor's Office (File 22), demanding an explanation of why the specialized prosecutor's office rejected the documents from the Nova Gorica police. After all, the final paragraph of appeal protocol No. 2600-2/2024/15 clearly states the decision to transfer all materials to the specialized prosecutor's office for further investigation.
In response letter VDT-Tu-6-4/47/2024/IK (file 24), the Supreme Prosecutor's Office agreed that the representative of the Minister of the Interior had violated the law and filed a statement against her with the District Prosecutor's Office of Nova Gorica.
But the Nova Gorica District Attorney ignored the statement and then refused to open a case against the representative of the Minister of the Interior without providing any evidence, despite the obviousness of the guilt, as confirmed by the documents she signed. Worse still, the decision, dated January 23, 2025, reached me only on March 18, 2025, depriving me of the opportunity to appeal it within the statutory deadline. The decision in question is District Attorney's Decision No. Kt/23414/2024/2/PP/EP-sb (File 50).
I filed a protest with the Supreme Prosecutor's Office against the Nova Gorica District Prosecutor's decision (File 51), which the Supreme Prosecutor's Office then sent back to the Nova Gorica District Prosecutor's Office (File 54). However, the protest was ignored, and the Interior Minister's representative has still not been held accountable.
The complaint sent to the Minister of Internal Affairs regarding the illegal actions of his representative (File 23) turned into yet another farce. The head of the complaints department, whose signature appears next to that of the Minister of Internal Affairs' representative on the falsified decision, cynically lied in his response. He claimed that I had allegedly requested that all documents be forwarded to the police headquarters, even though appeal protocol 260-24/2024/4 clearly states that all documents must be transferred to the specialized prosecutor's office. Furthermore, the head of the complaints department at the Ministry of Internal Affairs directly stated that it was impossible to file a complaint against the Minister of Internal Affairs' representative at all, thereby effectively granting her carte blanche to violate any laws or human rights. Details of this outrageous response from the Ministry of Internal Affairs (092-1588/2024/2) can be found in File 29.
Thus, all my appeals to the specialized prosecutor's office and the police were dismissively dismissed, and the sacred principle of equality of all before the law, guaranteed by Article 7 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, was trampled upon.
Attached files:
• File 9. Appeal Protocol No. 2600-2/2024/15.
• File 9.1. Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) Decision 2600-131/2024/6.
• File 16. Response from the Supreme Prosecutor's Office VDT-Tu-6-4/47/2024/4.
• File 22. Complaint to the Supreme Prosecutor's Office dated October 28, 2024.
• File 24. Statement from the Supreme Prosecutor's Office VDT-Tu-6-4/47/2024/IK.
• File 50. Decision of the District Prosecutor's Office Kt/23414/2024/2/PP/EP-sb.
• File 51. Appeal against the decision District Prosecutor NG of 11.04.2025.
• File 54. Notification of the Supreme Prosecutor's Office Ktr/5/2025/KC.
• File 23. Complaint against the representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) of 29.10.2024.
• File 29. Response of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) 092-1588/2024/2.
Annotation to the documents confirming the violation of human rights by the Senior Public Prosecutor of the Specialized Prosecutor's Office of Slovenia and the Complaints Department of the Ministry of the Interior:
Faced with the specialized prosecutor's office's apparent reluctance to consider my complaint regarding the illegal actions of the Nova Gorica police and my statements against the Nova Gorica Chamber of Craftsmen and Entrepreneurs, I arrived at the office to submit a written request for provision information of the investigation into my complaints. However, the senior Slovenian prosecutor, disregarding established procedure, refused to accept my application properly---by certifying my copy with a stamp and signature---demanding that I leave it with the concierge. Rejecting her offer, I demanded that the concierge draw up a report declaring the senior Slovenian prosecutor's refusal to accept the victim's complaint. The prosecutor responded with an unthinkable order: to call the police for my illegal detention.
I waited for the police in the lobby of a public office building. The officers who arrived were drunk and refused to provide their names, positions, or police station number. After I informed them that the purpose of my visit was to file an application with the specialized prosecutor's office and asked them to draw up a report refusing to accept the victim's application, they threatened to arrest me and demanded that I leave the building. I had to go to the nearest post office to mail the application to the specialized prosecutor's office with a postal notification (File 19).
Following the unmotivated aggression by the senior prosecutor, I filed a complaint with the Supreme Prosecutor's Office regarding her illegal actions (File 20) and also filed a complaint with the Ministry of Internal Affairs regarding the police officers' conduct (File 21). I specifically highlighted the prosecutor's refusal to certify my copy of the application and the attempted illegal arrest.
In its response, the Supreme Prosecutor's Office paradoxically claimed no violations on the part of the senior prosecutor, while simultaneously acknowledging her obligation to stamp the applicant's copy of the application upon request (File 24). I appealed this absurd response directly to the Supreme Prosecutor, but my complaint was ignored (File 25).
The situation with my complaint to the Ministry of the Interior against the police turned out to be even more egregious. Initially, the Ministry of the Interior officials pretended not to understand the meaning of my complaint, demanding that I provide an explanation of the violation of my rights within five days (File 26). This is a favorite tactic of the Slovenian Ministry of the Interior: if a timely response is not provided, the complaint is simply closed. Having managed to provide the requested explanation, in which I again pointed out the violations of my rights by the police, emphasizing that they had already been described in detail in the original complaint (File 27), I also filed a complaint with the Minister of the Interior against his subordinates (File 28).
Apparently, my complaint provoked extreme hostility among the Ministry of Internal Affairs officers, as they categorically closed my case against the police officers (File 36). My appeal was denied, and my request for a confrontation with the officers was ignored. Despite my subsequent attempts to appeal the decision, they yielded no results.
The most outrageous fact is that the responses to my complaints from the Ministry of the Interior and the Supreme Prosecutor's Office of Slovenia came from the very same individuals against whom I filed these complaints.
I filed a complaint against the head of the complaints department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to the Supreme Prosecutor's Office (file 38), but it was also forwarded to a specialized prosecutor's office, to the very same prosecutor who called the aforementioned police officers to arrest me (file 41-42).
Thus, once again, my complaints and statements were cynically ignored. And my application to the specialized prosecutor's office for provision information of the investigation remained unanswered.
Attached files:
• File 19. Request for information dated 17.10. 2024.
• File 20. Complaint against Senior Prosecutor dated 23.10.2024.
• File 21. Complaint against the police dated 24.10.2024.
• File 24. Statement from the Prosecutor's Office VDT-Tu-6-4/47/2024/IK.
• File 25. Complaint on the Supreme Prosecutor dated 11.11. 2024.
• File 26. Response from the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) 2600-498/2024/4.
• File 27. My explanations for the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) dated 16.11.2025.
• File 28. Complaint against employees of the MIA dated 19.11. 2024.
• File 36. Response of the MIA 2600-498/2024/9.
• File 38. Complaint against the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) dated 20.12.2024.
• File 41. Response from the Supreme Prosecutor's Office VDT-Ktr/4/2025-2/KC.
• File 42. Response from the Supreme Prosecutor's Office VDT-Tu 6-4/47/2024/15.
Abstract of documents confirming human rights violations by the District Prosecutor of Nova Gorica and the Supreme Prosecutor's Office of Slovenia:
In August 2025, I received a letter from the Novo Mesto prosecutor's office in Slovenia (file 65.1). I was very surprised by this letter, as I had never had any contact with anyone from that city. In the letter, the Novo Mesto district prosecutor rejected my statement against a Slovenian lawyer who had been convicted of fraud (file 65.2). I had filed this statement to the Nova Gorica police in November 2024. How my case materials from one end of the country could have ended up in a prosecutor's office located on the other side of Slovenia remained a mystery to me, as this constituted a violation of jurisdiction. Moreover, the lawyer's actions constituted such a clear violation of the law, effectively a carbon copy of the fraud article in the Slovenian Criminal Code, that a refusal to open a case was simply unthinkable. I even included the text of the article in my application.
The essence of the lawyer's crime was this: hired to sue a doctor whose actions led to my terminal cancer, he received an advance payment and then refused to carry out my instructions. Instead, the lawyer sent me an invoice for services he never provided, and more importantly, I never requested them. The invoice amount exactly matched the advance payment he received. Thus, he committed classic fraud, right out of the Slovenian criminal code.
I knew very well that, according to Article 187 of the Slovenian Prosecutor's Office Act, a prosecutor has no right to make decisions on cases outside his jurisdiction, except in cases of direct order from the Supreme Prosecutor of Slovenia.
In response to this obvious abuse of power, I filed a complaint with the Supreme Prosecutor's Office against the Novo Mesto prosecutor (file 65), demanding his dismissal under Article 80 of the Prosecutor's Office Act and his prosecution. As expected, the Supreme Prosecutor ignored my complaint, thereby, like the Novo Mesto district prosecutor, violating the Slovenian Prosecutor's Office Act and my civil rights.
Attached files:
File 65. Complaint against Novo Mesto District Prosecutor.
File 65.1 Decision of the Novo Mesto District Prosecutor NMKT9282025BP.
File 65.2 Statement to the police against a fraudulent lawyer.
Abstract of documents confirming inhumane treatment in Slovenian healthcare and the use of drugs that have not undergone full clinical trials:
My primary care physician ignored my complaints of coughing up blood and headache for seven months and refused to refer me for a CT scan (details in File 69). As a result, I was diagnosed with stage 4 lung adenocarcinoma, T4N2M1c (diagnosis in File 71). This diagnosis was made at the University Clinic of Respiratory and Allergic Diseases Golnik.
Treatment at the Golnik Clinic violated the minimum requirements of the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), Article 18 of the Slovenian Constitution, and Article 5 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The violations are detailed below:
1. My treatment for stage 4 lung adenocarcinoma was administered by a pulmonologist, who personally made decisions regarding medication administration. ESMO's minimum requirements state that stage 4 lung adenocarcinoma can only be treated by an experienced oncologist and only according to an approved oncology consultation plan. My request for a copy of the oncology consultation -- council (file 72, item 10) was ignored; instead, I received an invitation to see a psychiatrist (file 73). After the unlawful termination of my stage 4 lung cancer treatment, Golnik Clinic repeatedly sent similar requests.
2. The pulmonologist prescribed Lorviqua as therapy and concealed from me the fact that this medication had not undergone full clinical trials and only had conditional approval from the European Medicines Agency (EMA). (Screenshot, EMA File 74). Also, to justify prescribing this medication, the doctor cited the presence of metastases, including to the brain, in official medical documents, even though the diagnostics did not confirm them (MRI File 75).
3. The doctor prescribed the neurotoxic drug Crestor, ostensibly to treat hyperlipidemia, but a blood test on the day of Crestor's prescription showed a cholesterol level of only 5.3, which is not a sign of hyperlipidemia (blood test - File 76). My symptoms of persistent deterioration throughout treatment mirrored those described on the Crestor website, which require immediate discontinuation of the medication (Crestor website - File 77). Even when I showed the doctor this warning on the Crestor manufacturer's website, she continued to maintain that Crestor was completely safe and did not discontinue it. Furthermore, when I stopped taking Crestor on my own, she demanded that I immediately resume taking it.
Crestor and Lorviqua are neurotoxic drugs; both damage the cardiovascular system, central nervous system, and liver, and synergistically enhance each other's harmful effects. Furthermore, since Lorviqua has not undergone full clinical trials, its harmful effects on the human body are not fully understood.
4. Throughout the treatment, my cardiovascular condition steadily worsened. The therapy was accompanied by heart attacks, muscle cramps, severe dizziness, and ultimately, I was practically unable to move. I constantly reported this to the doctor, but she ignored all my complaints and never recorded them in official medical records. Instead, she wrote that I was tolerating the medication well and categorically refused to refer me to a neurologist. Therefore, the Golnik Clinic took no action to alleviate the patient's negative symptoms.
5. Despite my written complaint on 3.09.2025 to the director of the Golnik clinic about a sharp deterioration in my health and the immoral actions of the pulmonologist (file 78), no measures were taken to eliminate the symptoms, no official appeal was filed, and the pulmonologist continues to treat cancer at the Golnik clinic.
6. As a result of the immoral actions of the doctors at the Golnik Clinic, I suffered a stroke, and an ambulance took me to Portogruaro Hospital. However, the Golnik Clinic ignored the recommendations of a neurologist at Portogruaro Hospital to urgently diagnose my cardiovascular system, resulting in my condition worsening.
7. Despite my stroke, Golnik Clinic staff forced me to drive 400 km, under the guise of an invitation to a medical consultation (File 79), to conduct an illegal appeal with the pulmonologist to absolve her of criminal liability. I notified the clinic director of the incident and demanded an official appeal, but it was never conducted (File 80).
8. After an unsuccessful appeal by a pulmonologist, she refused to continue my treatment for stage 4 cancer, and the Golnik Clinic refused to assign me a new doctor or resume therapy. The doctor tried to make me look crazy, and the Golnik Clinic began sending me incessant emails demanding that I have to a psychiatric evaluation with their psychiatrist.
Understanding that they wanted to falsify my psychiatric report, I underwent an independent psychiatric examination by a forensic psychiatrist from Milan and provided the Golnik Clinic with a Slovenian translation of the psychiatrist's report (Files 81 and 81.1). However, in response, I received another invitation to see their psychiatrist (File 83). Please note that, in accordance with the Slovenian Constitution and European Union law, they do not have the right to deny the report of a forensic psychiatrist from another EU country, nor do they have the right to compel me to undergo a psychiatric examination, as explained to the clinic (File 84).
The staff at the Golnik Clinic justified the need for a psychiatric examination specifically to assess my central nervous system damage as a result of therapy. But we all know that central nervous system disorders are diagnosed and treated by a neurologist, while a psychiatrist treats mental disorders, such as schizophrenia.
Thus, the inadequate attempts by the Golnik Clinic staff to conduct a psychiatric examination on me, specifically with their psychiatrist, and the refusal to accept the conclusion of a forensic psychiatrist clearly indicate that their sole purpose is to falsify the psychiatric report in order to absolve themselves of responsibility for criminal offenses and annul all my previous actions to expose corruption and human rights violations in the Slovenian Ministry of Internal Affairs and Prosecutor's Office.
9. I had a repeat test for the ALK gene mutation at the Aviano Oncological Cancer Center, but it was negative, casting doubt on my diagnosis. I reported this to the clinic and requested a repeat test, as I had been diagnosed with ALK mutation-positive at the Golnik Clinic in order to be treated with Lorviqua. My request, as well as my request for a new treatment plan and a new oncologist, were ignored (file 85).
Thus, based on the questionable choice of medications for treatment, the constant denial of necessary medical care and diagnostics to the patient, as well as the concealment of his actual complaints and their failure to reflect them in official medical records, we draw an unequivocal conclusion: the purpose of the treatment was intentional harm to the patient's health and the illegal trial of Lorviqua. This conclusion is supported by the absence of mutations in the ALK gene tested at the Centro di Riferimento Oncologico Aviano ISTITUTO NAZIONALE TUMORI, as well as the most recent PET/CT scan, which revealed no lung abnormalities.
We will further investigate the circumstances of this case, but the discontinuation of treatment for incurable stage 4 cancer, the refusal to provide the patient with a treatment plan for other medications, and the continued coercion of the patient to take the deadly drug Lorviqua indicate sadistic tendencies on the part of the medical staff at the Golnik Clinic and an open hatred of people of a different nationality. It follows from their behavior that they enjoy watching a person slowly die from cancer, which they themselves brought him to.
Attached files:
File 69. Application to court against Physician.
File 71. Diagnosis.
File 72. My request for the copy of the council.
File 73. Request for a psychiatrist`s opinion in Slovenian.
File 74. Screenshot from the European Medicines Agency website.
File 75. MRI.
File 76. Crestor was prescribed.
File 77. Screenshot of Crestor website.
File 78. Notification of deterioration health and complaint 03.09.2025.
File 79. Invitation to personal consultation with doctor.
File 80. Notification about an attempt to conduct an illegal appeal.
File 81. Forensic psychiatrist`s report and test.
File 81.1. Forensic psychiatrist`s report in Slovenian.
File 83. New requirement to see psychiatrist and correspondence.
File 84. Explanation of the right to a psychiatric examination.
File 85. Requirement a new treatment plan and a new test ALK.