[Sweden]: Message to the Chief Justice

[Connor]

Security Classification: SECURE
Document Classification and Security Act 1995​

---

Dear Chief Justice Rolf Olhouser,

I write to you in conjunction with Article 15 of the Global Assembly Statue of the Court, specifically subsection 2, in order to appeal the sentencing of Arab Republic of Egypt v. Storhet Group.

First and foremost I must make it clear that I represent Storhet Group in all legal matters. I must stress that this correspondence and any files transmitted with it are confidential, subject to the Swedish Document Classification and Security Act 1995, and intended solely for the use of the Chief Justice of the International Court of Justice or any entity to whom the recipient reasonably believes is required to be privy to such information to allow for the appeal of sentencing. Any views of opinions presented are those of the author and represent those of Storhet Group. Any returning correspondence should be done so with the appropriate level of encryption and security in order to ensure the preservation of particularly sensitive and legally exclusive personal information.

I note that as stated in Article 15, section 3, subsection a, that your office holds the power to waive an appeal if there is risk of such a process causing immediate or imminent and unlawful harm or injury to be experiences by any person; cause loss of life or limb; cause serious, immediate and unlawful damage to property; cause any act, treaty, resolution or law to be undermined or contravened or cause a serious risk to civil unrest in-which the court deems a risk to the general public's safety. Through analysis of these sub-subsections I have concluded that the only one that is potentially relevant to be sub-subsection iv however given that this matter is subject to civil law, a notoriously complex and difficult area for justice, rather than any criminal negligence - I would beg the question whether an appeal would undermine of contravene civil law or much rather allow for the fair execution of a trial in line with the International Declaration of Human Rights, as recognised by the Global Assembly.

Storhet Group have determined it necessary to appeal the sentencing of Arab Republic of Egypt v. Storhet Group for the following matter in part due to a violation of Article 15, subsection 12, of the Statue of the Court in-which you as Chief Justice are bound to state the reason on which the verdict has been based; which you failed to do following deliberation between the justices. I also would like to note the court's failure to identify, acknowledge or punish blatant violations of civil law by the Arab Republic of Egypt; violations which were commit before the alleged breaches by Storhet Group and evidently deemed unlawful by the court. This is not a fair trial.

Finally we would like to query whether there is any statute of limitations in respect to the International Court of Justice, given that this matter has now spanned over a year from the date of alleged offences and any statue of repose given that is took an additional three months for the complainant to raise the matter to the International Court of Justice in the first place.

I appreciate your time and look forward to the provision of a date for the appeal to take place.

Regards,
Karl Vikström
Senior Legal Advisor
Storhet Group

Odinson

---

Copyright © Storhet Group
All information is subject to the Swedish Document Classification and Security Act 1995​

 

[Odinson]

A secure response from the Chief Justice would be sent in which he explained that he was waiving the appeal in according with Article 15.3.a.3 of the Statute of The Court. He explained, in depth, that withholding billions of dollars from the Egyptian government would be detrimental to the African country, especially when its obvious that it is rightfully owed to them. The Chief Justice did all of this without admitting any kind of fault on his behalf, or the court's behalf. They would have to pay the fines and make the payments as previously stated. There was now no other measure of appeal that could be taken by the Swedes.
Connor

 

[Connor]

Storhet Group resends the request to appeal, denoting that points of law have been misguided in the judgement of the organisation and the response from the Chief Justice was a blatant attempt to avoid a retrial with a quick-drafted response - the counter-claim by Storhet Group has been ignored by the International Court of Justice. There is clear violation and manipulation of the Statue of the Court and the organisation pursue's the right to appeal judgement.

Odinson