Battistelli and Minnoye have effectively placed themselves above the law, having created new instruments of coercion and unjust power over staff

Summary: Why EPO management perceives itself as exempted from its own rules and outside the law of host nations, and how it achieved or attained these God-like powers

In part one, part two, and part three we carefully looked -- more or less retroactively -- at how EPO management gave itself supreme powers with minimal or zero oversight. We moreover considered how it proceeded to sending to exile various members of staff who -- although perfectly competent -- were viewed as a danger to the leadership and thus terminated using bizarre pretexts, without the lawmaker/accuser/judge/executioner (the EPO's President) facing any consequences or even veto, except a hoard of protesting (and more recently striking) staff. The Administrative Council continues to be far too soft and thus complicit in all this. We heard that there are prospects of lawsuits against them (or their national offices) for this complicity, setting aside the imminent lawsuit against EPO management.

"This is like a monarchy at the very heart of an international organisation and it's designed to eliminate dissent or resistance, however legitimate it may be."Documents we showed in previous parts marked or at least signaled the beginning of the bizarre disciplinary procedures against staff representatives at the EPO. They were not punished and/or dismissed (even lost pension rights in one case) for their union roles; at least that's how EPO management tried to make it appear. In October 2014 we published Circular 342 [PDF]. These are the Investigation Guidelines at the EPO (11 pages in total). Not too long ago we learned that Battistelli considers the Code of Conduct, which he himself violates (see installment one of this series), part of this aforementioned legal framework, even though he wrote it entirely himself. This is like a monarchy at the very heart of an international organisation and it's designed to eliminate dissent or resistance, however legitimate it may be. "When you start reading it," told us the source of Battistelli's own Code of Conduct, "you'll get that the Code of Conduct is meant to apply to everyone except himself. Management by intimidation started with the publication of the Code of Conduct in 2012. The next step was the Investigation Guidelines together with the Guidelines on Harassment."

When the Administrative Council and Board 28 were finally going to do something about Battistelli's lawlessness guess who stepped in? It was Mr Minnoye and his now-infamous letter. Speaking of Minnoye, somebody sent us these amusing reminders of how he too ignores (or makes up) the law, and is proud of it!

Mr Minnoye’s respect for the judiciary...

Vraag: Dus U zult de uitspraak van de hoogste rechter in Nederland niet respecteren?

Minnoye: Ja.

Translation

Question: So you will not respect the decision of the highest judge in the Netherlands?

Minnoye: Yes (indeed).

Mr Minnoye is a repeat offender. Already on earlier occasions he has shown very little respect for the judiciary, see [IP Kat]

To quote Minnoye's letter from that time:

Dear all,

In relation to the letter sent by Professor Sir Robin Jacob to Mr. Kongstad, VP1 asked to share with you the following remarks:

Sir Jacob 1) is not aware of all facts 2) is not aware of what the decision of the president was (office ban) 3) does not understand that the AC took the decision based on facts! 4) does not understand that this case has nothing to do with the independence of the Boards! 5) and nevertheless writes this letter!

Best regards,

This, as someone put it, "is only matched by the Dutch government’s concern about human rights" (based on the same as the above link). To quote: "De regering maakt zich weliswaar zorgen over de sociale situatie bij het Octrooibureau, maar stelt: "voor de vraag of een internationale organisatie immuniteit toekomt (is) niet van belang of haar mensenrechtenschendingen of andere schendingen van internationaal recht verweten worden."

Translated into English: "The (Dutch) government is concerned about the social situation within the Patent Office, but considers that for the question whether or not an international organisation has immunity it is irrelevant whether it is accused of violations of human rights or other violations of international law."

What an utterly poor hand-waving gesture. As one Dutch article put it, "What If the European Patent Office Were to Torture?" Should Battistelli and Minnoye be allowed to get away with that, too? Gods in their own mind, they already psychologically torture people and then feel stunned that the German/Bavarian press highlights correlation to suicides. ⬆