On 21. 3. 2006, criminal proceedings were instituted against my person according to the paragraph 160, section 1, of criminal procedure act, as charged with commiting a criminal act of connivance according to the par. 165, section 1 of criminal procedure act (oof!), with a possible one-year imprisonment.

The reason were my words which I had said on TV in a documentary called „Experimental animals“. Such words were not favoured by Mrs Iva Pipalová, who tortures animals professionally (pursuant to law), and who defends the state controlled cruelty and murder of animals, and she also audits The Central Commitee For The Protection Of Animals, where she is a chairwoman in The Commitee for Experimental Animals Protection. In this commitee, she represents The Experimental Animals Science Society (see http://www.svscr.cz/files/ib0604.pdf ). She is also a member of CZECOPA (here) comprising of „...corporate bodies and personal entities from the science and education fields, non-governmental organisations, industrial and government institutions – as 4 equal partners in the Society with an aim to support and implement the so-called. „3R“...“ in the laboratory practice.

( Do not trust or support organizations which speak about animal protection but facilitate the concept of 3R.)

Mrs Iva Pipalová is currently employed as a director of Laboratory Animals Breeding And Custom Facility at the Medical Faculty of the Masaryk University in Brno (here). In the past, she was employed at the Academy Of Sciences CR (here). At the time when the Academy sold its menagerie to a firm called AnLab (here), whose main activity is „from 1992 to provide laboratory animals, animal models and laboratory diagnostic services to scientific/research and testing stations in the Czech and Slovak Republics..“, Mrs Pipalová joined the (as she once told me) AnLab with her animals and not for selfish reasons. As I met her, I believe her, and I do not mean it ironically, I add that she is a supporter of the so-called laboratory animals welfare and in my opinion she tortures and kills animals only on a scale that she thinks is necessary.

According to the investigating policeman‘s statement, she drew attention to my words from the documentary „Experimental animals“, in which she also participated, via Email.

The main evidence against me was my own statement. I repeated what I publicly write and talk about at lectures and I dropped the posibility to file a complaint. (I must admit that I was quite curious what was going to happen.) Pursuant to mainly my statement they instituted criminal proceedings with a possible one-year imprisonment.

Originally, I didn’t want to intervene in the whole thing apart from repeating my defense of ALF and Justice Department (also ARM and others). After several discussions with a few people I changed my view, because, firstly, I noticed more fear than determination and a certain paralysis from repression, secondly, I don’t want to be a hero nor a martyr jot be considered as such, thirdly, didn’t want to create a negative precedent, at fourth, the whole case started to seem more like a stupidity even for the system which usurps me.

I was offered, among others, a professional help from D.C.L. Kateřina Šimáčková. We filed a complaint about my prosecution. This complaint was rejected since I dropped the posibility to file the complaint during the police questioning. At the same time, the State’s Attorney abrogated the decision for the prosecution against me as unfounded.
 

POLICE OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC
The town of Brno Municipal Head Office
OOP Brno Komárov
Zvonařka 18
617 00 Brno

No. MRBM – 3821/TČ – 16 – 2007

POLICE RULING

The Police Authority of the Municipal Head Office Brno ruled as follows:

According to the paragraph 160, section 1, the criminal prosecution of MICHAL KOLESÁR,
born 28.3. 1972 in OLOMOUC …

who is accused of commiting a crime of connivance, according to the paragraph 160, section 1:

On 12.9. 2006, in Brno-Tuřany, he took a part in filming a documentary for the Czech TV TS Brno called “Experimental animals”. The film was shown on 21.11. 2006 and 22.11. 2006 on the Czech Channel 2, where he spoke to the camera and said: “I consider the Animal Liberation Front’s, Justice Department’s and others‘ activities as highly positive. Those are people who are willing to break the law in order to help somebody, to get the animals out of labs, or at least to cause damage to those who profit from suffering of the animals. The law has not any determining authority to say what is good and what is wrong. The law just has a describing value. It is often abusive or it goes wrong. We have to take into consideration the position of those experimental animals, what happens to them, they are cut, burnt, their eyes are burnt, their genotypes or fenotypes are muddled with, their bones are crushed and their social bonds are broken and they call it science.” He knew that the shots would be broadcasted by the public television channel all over the Czech Republic,

thus he publicly connives the criminal act … 

The Police of the Czech Republic
The town of Brno Municipal Head Office
OOP Brno Komárov
Zvonařka 18
617 00 Brno

MRBM – 3821/TČ – 16 – 2007

Subject: Appeal against the above subject no. MRBM – 3821/TČ – 16 – 2007
from 21.3. 2007

..... I do not deny that I had said the quoted statements and that I exercise those opinions, nonetheless I am convinced that my announcements are a rightful contribution to the public debate about the human relationship with other animals and the announcements meet my freedom of speech. The fact is that my views are not pursuant to law or that they are in opposition to the current legislative standards, but this can not be indictable.

I advocate and consider the Animal Liberation Front’s positive animal protection work (and other similar activities) both in the general and specific fields, since I do not know any other way how to help the individual animals used and abused at the moment, and because I refuse to concentrate only on a possible improvement of tomorrow which is something uncertain and ignorant of the presently used and abused animals. Simply protesting is not enough.

I value the Animal Liberation Front’s work (and other similar activities) positively, and no era or owners‘ tributary law can change it.

Nevertheless, so as not to create a negative precedent in the already limited and restricted (by the state and other showbusiness entities) freedom of speech, I state that in the documentary „Experimental animals“ I had not praised any particular offender. Neither any offender nor an offence is stated in the mentioned ruling. .... 

... I am convinced that the experimenting on animals is a tyranny, and in relation to its primary victims, the so-called experimental animals, it is a crime in the sense of a malign act. I am convinced that the experiments on the non-human animals also go against the man and human health and they cannot be considered as firm just because it suits someone or provides economic and legislative advantages and feeling of superiority. There has been a discussion about the intangible rights holders many times which always overstepped the taboos (slaves, women, mentally or physically disabled persons, various racial groups /if we accept the racial theory/ etc.). Therefore it is legitimate to try to expand the rights onto other subjects, thus the debate that concerns the ways of how to expand such the intangible rights is legitimate.

If we do not have the right to opposition and disobedience, we live in totalitarianism.

From the above mentioned reasons I ask that the charges to be dropped.

I have not commited any crime.

With good spirit and peace
Michal Kolesár 

Court ruling about the Prosecution

Court ruling Complaint 

Brno State Council ruling

The documentary „Experimental animals“ received a prize of the Vesmír magazine (here) at the 42 annual Academia film Olomouc 2007 as the best Czech documentary in the field of sciences. You can watch the film here.

Realita.tv very openly informs even about the most radical and most militant animal rights organizations: ALF etc. So far nobody else has done it in such an open way in the Czech Republic … Do you think that such tactics will lead to a success?

First of all, I think it is important to openly confront demonizing of those activities. Be it from the state, industry, non-profit sector, majority or minority opinions. We are an anti-terrorist not terrorist movement.

Thanks to this work, the animal rights movement has records of mistreatment of animals in laboratories and on farms, evidence for the public, financial loss to the supporters of parasiting on animals, stopped projects, shut-down laboratories and so-called breeding stations. Thousands of animals have been liberated from cruelty and unnecessary deaths, thousands of people have changed their views towards the animal welfare.

Of course, it is a limited accomplishment, but even the legal animal protections are able to achieve a partial success. Moreover, they maintain reversed priorities. For them, saving of life is not as important as property, law, public majority opinion. Or they behave as if it did not exist.

The truth is that those people often spoil the ALF‘s and other groups‘ work, and they do it wittingly, although for different reasons. Generally, they do not consider the consequences because they do not overstep the legal boundaries.

From Move Your Ass interview

Regarding to my very restricted knowledge of english language, thanks to Vegnetta for the translation of this text.
MK