English Translation

Č.j.Zm I 104/33 133 4 On behalf of the Republic ! The Supreme Court, as the Court of Cassation, today, 30 October 1933, after non-public proceedings, held in public session concerning the annulment appeal of the prosecutor against the decision of the District Criminal Court in Prague dated 1 December 1932, č.j Dk XII 2141/32-27, with which Dr. Jan Karlik and Ing. Václav Šiwel was acquitted according to § 259 č.2 St. Proz.Ord. of the charge for transfer under § 11 č.2. d.Ges. for the protection of the Rep., as follows: The nullity appeal is, in so far as it concerns the statement of the acknowledgment of the accused Ing. VáClay Šivel. Likewise, the invalidity complaint is dismissed in so far as it concerns the acquittal of Dr. Jan Karlik concerning the contested sentence "namely also the designation...is actually taboo", on page 63 of the contested brochure. Reason: Concerning the sentence contained in the preface of the contested brochure "how to achieve, for example... mutual effect", the decision states that the defendant Václav Šiwel alone, not Dr. Jan Karlik, is not responsible for this position. In the further considerations, the decision in this directive dealt with the guilt of the accused Ing. Šivel. This statement, as far as the defendant Dr. Jan Karlik is concerned, does not contradict the complaint and therefore the acquittal concerning Dr. Yan Karlik has obtained legal validity in relation to this sentence. On this point, Václav Šiwel bases himself on the consideration that this statement is invalid from the objec- tive side, but that the comparison of Gajda's fate with the fate of the President of the Republic is not apt, that the honour of the president of the republic is not touched and that this was not made ridiculous. This decision is the nullity complaint with the objection - 2 -