EPO Administrative Council Meeting Turning Point – Part III: How Benoît Battistelli Planned to Expand His Attacks on EPO Staff (But Failed)
Summary: Battistelli’s plans to destroy the careers of people who stand in the way of his misguided ambitions have fallen on deaf ears and he was forced to backtrack, which is unusual but not entirely unprecedented
“Has Battistelli’s time run out? Will the large nations (EU member states) realise that he — not those whom he accuses — is the villain who needs dismissing?”Denmark — like The Netherlands — still has a rather controversial monarchy culture (same as here in the UK), so it’s not entirely shocking — perhaps even expected — that a man with a name like Kong-Stad (kong in Danish means king) overlooks Battistelli’s bad behaviour, which resembles the behaviour of kings. Look at who Jesper Kongstad hangs out with — people who wear dead animals on them and call it a “fashion”.
Based on information we have been receiving, Mr. Kongstad might have to change his behaviour. Has Battistelli’s time run out? Will the large nations (EU member states) realise that he — not those whom he accuses — is the villain who needs dismissing? It sounds as though the big EU/non-EU nations are no longer willing to be lied to, bamboozled, manipulated, and 'bought' by Battistelli. The remainder of the series will shed some light on what is going on behind closed doors, based on reliable sources of ours.
We begin by showing what Battistelli was hoping to accomplish.
“It’s quite revealing that Battistelli didn’t have an easy time.”“B28/12/16 contains the “SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS” of the Board 28 meeting on 22 September 2016. The president insists that the judge of the Boards of Appeal (Disciplinary Case D1/15) will be accused again (item 3),” a source told us. We will certainly expect more of that as Battistelli sinks deeper and deeper in the mud or the quicksand.
Above is the text in the form the above images (included to help reassure readers that it’s not faked as we have a 100% track record of not uploading forged or manipulated material).
Also see a few pages of CA/52/16 Rev. 1 (Investigation Guidelines
[PDF]). “The recent IP Watch,” our source told us, “cites a passage of item 7. The German delegation criticised the President’s view of “the right to be silent“ in CA/52/16 Rev. 1 + additional documents (which is Battistelli’s proposal for the new Investigation Guidelines). Have a look at item 27 and Article 21a “Ethics and compliance” (5) of CA/52/16 Rev. 1.”
“So quite a few sources are telling us the same thing.”It’s quite revealing that Battistelli didn’t have an easy time. Ernst et al never gave Battistelli too much leeway. “Latest Rumors from the EPO’s Administrative Council Meeting Held in Munich on the 12 & 13 October,” another person told us, are quite revealing. We have actually been in touch with quite a large number of sources and this helps us corroborate or ascertain some claims.
“We have to wait till tomorrow for confirmed news about the latest AC,” one person told us, but we keep saying we will wait until it’s all confirmed. What about the rumours? Are they not worth airing already? We cannot emphasise strongly enough that this is — at least for now — an article that is mostly based on rumours, with confirmation yet to be made, e.g. in the official statements, reports, meetings, etc.
“Are “earthquakes” as he once called them starting to happen in Germany?”“Here is the information I got from an insider,” one person told us. “I hear now [that] three papers were withdrawn. The Board of Appeals building, investigation guidelines, disciplinary measures.”
“Seems the bigger countries all piled in against the president,” this source added, dubbing it “Excellent news!”
“I can confirm 2 documents,” added this source, “but I hope that the 3rd document about the Board of Appeals building will also be confirmed! One delegate said two [some time] this morning. The third was during the discussion today.”
“I can say the following,” another source told us. “Battistelli made a last-ditch attempt to propose a revision to the investigation guidelines where he continued to insist that the accused should have no right to remain silent because the European Convention of Human Rights didn’t cover Disciplinary Proceedings. It turned out he wasn’t telling the truth. After resistance from Board 28 he was forced to withdraw the document from the agenda.”
So quite a few sources are telling us the same thing. What a disaster for Battistelli and a fiasco that damages his credibility even within the upper circles at the Administrative Council. Are “earthquakes” as he once called them starting to happen in Germany? We shall say more about that in the next part. █