Deep State Austria

Visa - Application was rejected.

Let's take a closer look at this, I had submitted a visa application for my wife. My wife needs a visa to enter the EU/Austria. Regarding our situation: we are older people, married for 3 years, and now I wanted to visit Austria. Now to the pre-filled form. Point 2) The purpose and conditions of the planned stay were not proven. The purpose: quite simple, but too difficult for the Austrian embassy to introduce my wife to my family. That must not happen! Furthermore, it was planned to travel from Vienna to Salzburg. To visit sights. The conditions: Austria requires that the livelihood is secured by regular income, that health insurance covers all risks, and that suitable accommodation is available. Additionally, there must be no compelling reasons for refusal such as an existing entry or residence ban. This was fulfilled by us. I have regular income, I am retired and receive my pension. My wife is a housewife and has no income. According to valid legislation, it is okay if the husband has an income that secures the living, but it was rejected because I have nothing to do with my wife. (Some gentlemen would be pleased with this sentence!). We had health insurance, €30,000. The duration of the planned trip was 1 month. The accommodation was also available and still is, that is my daughter's apartment (she does not live there, she has moved out, by the way, I pay the rent, electricity, gas). There are also no compelling reasons. Apparently, for the embassy, there are. Maybe a flaw in intelligence. Anything is possible. Point 3) actually would have been addressed in Point 2. I do not want to repeat that, so here is a general legal statement: In the case of a Schengen visa, the lack of personal income of the spouse is not automatically a reason for rejection, as financial security can also be demonstrated by the inviting spouse or a sponsor. This was not done. The embassy explicitly stated that the spouse is analyzed completely independently. And my wife is a housewife, indeed with a lot of work, but little money. In principle, visa-required travelers must demonstrate sufficient financial means for their stay, and for a Schengen visa Type C, employment during the stay is not permitted. Employment was never planned. We wanted to visit Austria for 1 month. Legally, the lack of personal income of the wife alone is not an automatic reason for rejection of a Schengen visa. The crucial factor is whether the livelihood for the trip and the stay is secured overall; this can also be evidenced by the husband's income, a declaration of commitment, or other proofs. This was also evidenced. I provided a bank statement showing about 15,000 in the account at that time (not anymore today, this visa issue has cost a lot). It should have been sufficient, as I do not need to prove money or assets. This was also ignored. No money - no visa for my wife. Sad but true. Let's move on. Point 10) The information provided about the purpose and conditions was not credible. A wonderful sentence, unfortunately without substance. Flight tickets were submitted, insurance was submitted, conditions were rejected by the embassy, not carried out according to the legislation - as mentioned above. I do not know what the embassy believes, believing is not enough; if they believe, then they should go to church. Evidence is lacking! It can be assumed that a visa will be granted if the official feels comfortable. No one demands evidence or proof; this is a significant shortcoming. Point 13) A really nice point. Very enlightening. It states: There are reasonable doubts about your intention to leave the territory of the Member States before the visa expires. This sentence needs to be savored. Reasonable doubts? I have those too, but not because of the departure! This sentence without substance, like this whole piece of paper. What gives rise to "reasonable doubts"? Where does this doubt come from? What is it based on? To my knowledge, there is now an EES (Entry-Exit System). Something is completely unnecessary here; it is either the EES or the "unplanned departure." Again, perhaps, about hearsay, a statement that is completely pulled out of thin air. No evidence has been presented that would substantiate the claims made; what has been presented is simply far-fetched. We know that Austria is not an easy country. It goes even further. Mandate notice that the refusal if the Visa is correct.

After the visa was not granted, I came up with the idea of applying for family reunification. This is also not easy, as many documents need to be certified by the MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs). So, we had all the necessary documents and went to the embassy on July 27th. The documents were fine; they were supposed to be sent to MA35 to approve the family reunification, but the embassy has no influence on that. The decision is made by MA35. However, it did not get that far. The official asked a trick question: How long do you want to stay in Austria? Answer: 3 months. Rejected. A mistake may not automatically be held against the accused if the law does not consider it culpable; in the German Criminal Code (StGB), this is primarily regulated in Section 9. What Section 9 of the German Criminal Code states: A person who fails to recognize the wrongfulness of an act due to a legal error is not culpable if the error cannot be attributed to them. A mistake is culpable, for example, if the wrongfulness was easily recognizable or if the perpetrator failed to inform themselves about relevant regulations, even though they were obligated to do so. The application was not sent. A notice that it was rejected was refused. Now I have health insurance worth €100,000, which I can throw away. I would have needed 3 months to register my wife with the ÖGK, but that will not happen now. If the official had really paid attention to the documents, he could have noticed what he did not have, that the insurance is issued for 3 months; then he could have asked: Why only 3 months? But he did not do that, and he might have received the correct answer.What is also striking about this whole procedure is that he tried to convince my wife that the birth certificate is not correct, as a page is missing, which has been removed, which is not true; the MFA certified the birth certificate and marked it as correct. Taking all of this into account, one might ask what is going on? What interests are being prioritized? Mine are not! In principle, applications for a residence permit must be submitted to the Austrian diplomatic mission (embassy or consulate) abroad before entering Austria. The competent mission is determined by the applicant's place of residence. Applications must be submitted in person. The Austrian diplomatic mission checks the application for completeness and accuracy and forwards it to the competent immigration authority in Austria. This authority then verifies whether the requirements for issuing the residence permit are met. If the requirements are met, the Austrian diplomatic mission is notified. For applicants requiring a visa, an order is placed to issue one. The Austrian diplomatic mission abroad informs the applicant accordingly. The applicant can then enter Austria with the valid visa or, if no visa is required, without a visa (visa-free), and collect the residence permit in person from the competent immigration authority. The entry visa must be applied for within three months of notification from the German embassy or consulate regarding the intended approval of the visa application, and the residence permit must be collected from the immigration authorities in Germany within a further three months (six months total). Only upon receipt of the residence permit in Germany does the third-country national acquire the associated rights; in other words, employment is only permitted after receipt of the permit. The Austrian Embassy is the first point of contact abroad for family reunification and primarily handles the following tasks: 1. Receiving the application Family members living abroad must submit their application for a residence permit as a "Family Member" in person at the competent Austrian diplomatic mission. An appointment is usually necessary; waiting times can be several months. Children must also appear in person when submitting their application. 2. Checking for completeness and accuracy The Embassy checks the application and the accompanying documents, in particular: - valid travel document (passport) - birth certificate, marriage certificate, etc. - photographs - proof of health insurance coverage - any other documents required under the Austrian Settlement and Residence Act (NAG) or the Asylum Act (AsylG). The Embassy checks whether the documents are complete and formally correct and points out any missing items. 3. Forwarding to the competent authority in Austria After the formal review, the Embassy forwards the application to the competent authority in Austria: usually to The application should be submitted to the Governor of the Province or the authorized district administrative authorities (district administration or municipal authority), in Vienna, for example, to MA 35 (Immigration and Citizenship). The embassy does not decide on the granting of the visa; it is only responsible for receiving and preparing the application. 4. Communication and Visa Issuance The Austrian authorities in Austria make the decision regarding the residence permit. The embassy is informed of the decision and notifies the applicants. If the decision is positive, the embassy issues the required visa for entry (or hands over the residence permit, depending on the procedure). Here are some legal statements. Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to Respect for Private and Family Life): This article protects the right to family life. Restrictions are only permissible under certain conditions and within the framework of a proportionate and legitimate public interest. Anti-discrimination principle (Article 14 ECHR): It prohibits discrimination based on origin, status, etc. The different treatment of Austrian citizens compared to asylum seekers could be critical here. In Austrian asylum and immigration law, there are regulations regarding family reunification that may provide different conditions depending on the status of residence (e.g., subsidiary protection, refugee status). Temporary suspensions may occur for security or migration policy reasons, but must always adhere to the principles of the rule of law. The ECtHR makes it clear in its case law that a blanket and unjustified refusal of family reunification can be problematic. A suspensive measure should be time-limited and accompanied by understandable reasons. In my case, the embassy did not refuse it; it simply did not carry out the transport of the documents. The exception for Austrian citizens is generally justifiable (as their family reunification does not raise migration policy issues), but the unequal treatment of asylum seekers must be objectively justified. The blocking of appointment scheduling at embassies must not result in affected individuals being effectively and permanently excluded without a perspective or exceptions. In the EU context, relevant for Schengen visas, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) protects family life and prohibits arbitrary separations. The lack of independent income of the accompanying wife is not an automatic reason for rejection in the Visa Code (Regulation (EC) No. 810/2009, Article 21), as long as the livelihood is secured – for example, by the partner. States must process family reunification applications humanely and swiftly, especially for EU citizen family members. When applying for a Schengen visa (C/D) or spousal reunification, travel intent and likelihood of return are assessed, but human rights demand facilitation for families. In Nairobi (Kenyan embassy), simplified rules apply for EU family members. If rejected, a declaration of commitment or proof of joint finances is often helpful. Just a reminder: Article 8 – Right to Respect for Private and Family Life (1) Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home, and his correspondence. (2) The interference of a public authority with the exercise of this right is only permissible insofar as it is provided for by law and constitutes a measure that is necessary in a democratic society for national security, public safety and order, the economic well-being of the country, the defense of order, and for the prevention of criminal offenses, for the protection of health and morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Article 8 of the ECHR protects the right to family life from state interference, while the EU Free Movement Directive 2004/38/EC regulates the right of Union citizens and their family members to move and reside freely within the EU. Both legal frameworks guarantee the protection of family ties, with the directive specifically defining residence rights and family reunification. The following applies to the application for a residence permit:

These sentences suggest that if someone is married, he or she gets a visa. As we have seen, this is a misrepresentation of the facts. The piece of paper is worthless, It can also be burned; it has no effect. On July 27th at 3:01 PM, I contacted the Austrian embassy because I was told that I should state what I want. That is, of course, a low blow. What do I want!? No one has cared about that yet, and no one will care. This is a game being played here; they are making fun of me. It’s not a big deal; no one knows what I am thinking. Whoever is responsible! The family reunification was not granted. A corresponding rejection was denied, which has caused me another loss of €180 from the Austrian government. The 3 months referred to the registration with the ÖGK and not to the stay in Austria. It may have been a mistake. I find it very enlightening how things are handled here. "Go and apply for a Schengen visa!" Although we know that she will not get it. She is a housewife and has no income, so no visa will be issued. As I have already stated, this is a violation of human rights, family law, and marriage law, not to mention the Schengen regulations. This is now turning into a farce. Sad Austria. Best regards, Karl Glanz Dear Mr. Glanz, Thank you very much for your message and for sending the documents (this email as well as your email from July 29, 2026, at 10:14 AM). We would like to point out that regarding your request for a confirmation of the cancellation of your insurance, the embassy does not issue separate justifications for the non-issuance of a visa. The reasons for the refusal were communicated to the applicant in writing via a mandate decision. Your submission on September 19, 2025, could not be considered, as there was no timely response to the improvement request under § 13 para. 3 AVG (Order for the Supplementation of Documents - Power of Attorney). The legal remedy mentioned in the decision within the specified deadlines and conditions was therefore not utilized. With best regards, Austrian Embassy Nairobi Consular Department LMP

And this is the objection that is not accepted or is ignored. What it is about: It is about my wife not getting a visa to Austria. Briefly about us: We have been married for 3 years, living in Kenya. Last year we wanted to visit my homeland (is it still that?) which was denied. Now it has been 10 months that I have been fighting for this visa. The fundamental values of the EU: the respect for human dignity Freedom, Democracy, Equality, the rule of law and the protection of human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. We must take this to heart. Human rights guarantee the so-called "freedom of movement," Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but as we have seen here, only on paper. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees in Article 13 the right to move freely within a state and to choose one's residence freely. It also guarantees the right to leave any country – including one's own – and to return to one's country; borders may only restrict this right for legitimate reasons (e.g., security, pandemic, criminal enforcement). What about marriage, that is, the choice of partner? Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees adult men and women the right to marry and to found a family without restriction based on "race, nationality or religion." This right includes equal rights in marriage, during marriage, and upon its dissolution; a marriage may only be entered into based on the free and full consent of the future spouses. Human rights in the context of marriage demand not only the freedom to marry but also equality of spouses regarding rights in marriage and its dissolution (divorce, custody, property). Discriminatory regulations against women – such as unilateral divorce rights or property rules – conflict with international equality and anti-discrimination norms. For someone marrying a foreign woman, two major areas of law come into play: international family law (which substantive marriage law applies) and foreign or residence law (family reunification, residence permits, possibly citizenship). If the marriage is concluded before an Austrian registry office, it is formally valid under Austrian law; the substantive law applicable to the "legal effects of marriage" depends on nationality and habitual residence. If the spouses have different nationalities, Austrian international private law generally applies the law of the state where they have their common habitual residence; if they later separate, this law remains applicable as long as one person retains residence there. The residence rights of the foreign spouse are usually derived in practice from the Austrian or already residence-permitted husband and are regulated as family members under the Settlement and Residence Act (NAG). Family reunification is possible if the "reuniting" spouse has a suitable residence permit and meets general requirements: no threat to public interests, customary accommodation, health insurance, and secured livelihood, so that there is no financial burden for Austria. If the husband is an Austrian citizen or a EU citizen with residence rights under EU law, the (comparatively favorable) rules for family members of EU citizens/Austrians apply; the foreign spouse from a third country can then obtain a residence permit derived from EU law for more than three months. For the "reuniting" (e.g., Austrian man), there is no minimum age for family reunification; however, the foreign partner must be at least 21 years old if she is joining as a spouse under family reunification. In the case of residence as a "family member," the wife's residence initially depends on the husband's status; after a longer period and stable integration, she can obtain an independent residence right (e.g., through her own employment and fulfillment of integration conditions). The details (duration, language skills, secured livelihood) depend on the applicable citizenship law and the specific situation. Specifically, it is now about whether the official's question was permissible or not. Human rights guarantee the right to leave any country – including one's own – and to return to one's country; It must be clearly established here that this question was impermissible, because I am allowed to leave a country, re-enter, this right is granted to me. What the official meant was that Austria, the holy place, must not be left, otherwise the visa would be denied. And no written statement will be issued. A marriage validly concluded abroad is generally recognized in Austria. For Austrians, a certificate of marital capacity from the local registry office is often necessary, and the marriage must be registered upon return to Austria. Marriage establishes mutual rights and obligations, including the duty to live together, to fidelity, to decent interaction, and to mutual support. However, this paragraph is not valid in Austria. The visa was denied, so the marriage law is not valid. A Schengen visa application is generally assessed individually, even if the applicant is married. However, marital status and family circumstances must and should be considered as part of their personal life circumstances. The authority assesses in particular: Purpose and conditions of the trip; sufficient financial means; accommodation and travel health insurance; professional, economic, and social ties in the country of residence; possible family ties in the Schengen Area; the credibility that the applicant will return before the visa expires. If the applicant is the wife of an EU/EEA or Swiss national, special, simplified rules for family members may apply. This requires, among other things, proof of marriage and the planned joint trip or family reunification. An independent income of the wife is not strictly required for a Schengen visa, provided that the livelihood is secured by a declaration of commitment, private savings, or the spouse. Proof of financing without independent income A person submits an official declaration to the responsible immigration authority, stating that they will cover all costs for living expenses, accommodation, and medical care. For this, sufficient personal income or savings of the host must be demonstrated. If the partner travels with them or has sufficient financial means (proven by bank statements), they can cover the costs for both. NAG 10. for a "Residence Permit - Family Unity": Proof of the existence of family unity in the country of origin.  for a "Settlement Permit - Relative": a) Declaration of liability from the uniting party;  b) in the case of § 47 Abs. 3 Z 1 NAG: written declaration from the uniting party regarding the nature and extent of the maintenance provision;  c) in the case of § 47 Abs. 3 Z 2 NAG: proof of the existence of a permanent relationship with the uniting party in the country of origin and written declaration from the uniting party regarding the nature and extent of the maintenance provision;  d) in the case of § 47 Abs. 3 Z 3 lit. a NAG: written declaration from the uniting party regarding the nature and extent as well as the duration of the maintenance already provided;  e) in the case of § 47 Abs. 3 Z 3 lit. b NAG: proof of cohabitation in the country of origin and written declaration from the uniting party regarding the nature, extent, and duration of the maintenance already provided;  f) in the case of § 47 Abs. 3 Z 3 lit. c NAG: proof of serious health reasons and written declaration from the uniting party regarding the necessity of personal care by the uniting party.  And this is an abuse of office committed by the Austrian embassy. The decisive factor is the intent, the specific abuse of authority, and the violation of protected rights. An abuse of office under § 302 of the Penal Code occurs when a public official knowingly misuses their authority to harm the state or another person in their rights. Therefore, more than a mere erroneous decision or negligence is required. The current situation is as follows: Unfortunately, in the vast majority of cases, the authorities do not grant visas to spouses, as they assume the spouse will not leave the country again. This is, sadly, the current practice. This means that this refusal of visas and family reunification originates from the Austrian government. If this is true, then we have a huge problem. This is no longer about a simple visa issue; it's about human rights, democracy, and rights in general. Article 18 of the Constitution: (1) All state administration may be exercised only on the basis of laws. Article 20 of the Constitution: (2) By law, bodies may be established: 1. for expert review, 2. for monitoring compliance with the legality of administration and for monitoring matters of public procurement, 3. for deciding at the highest level, provided they are established collegially, include at least one judge, and their decisions are not subject to administrative appeal or modification, 4. with arbitration, mediation, and advocacy functions, 5. for safeguarding competition and for carrying out economic supervision, 5a. for the supervision and regulation of electronic media and for the promotion of the media," 6. for the implementation of specific matters of service and disciplinary law, 7. for the conduct and management of elections, or, 8. to the extent required by European Union law, are exempt from being bound by instructions from the bodies superior to them. Further categories of bodies independent of instructions may be created by state constitutional law. The law must provide for a right of oversight by the highest bodies appropriate to the task of the body independent of instructions, at least the right to be informed about all matters relating to the management of the bodies independent of instructions, and – insofar as these are not bodies pursuant to points 2, 3, 5a and 8 – the right to dismiss bodies independent of instructions for good cause. (3) All bodies entrusted with tasks of federal, state and municipal administration, as well as the bodies of other public corporations, are, unless otherwise provided by law, bound to secrecy regarding all matters that have come to their knowledge exclusively in the course of their official duties. Officials are bound by a duty of confidentiality to disclose facts whose secrecy is required in the interest of maintaining public peace, order, and security, comprehensive national defense, foreign relations, the economic interests of a public corporation, the preparation of a decision, or the overriding interests of the parties involved (official secrecy). Official secrecy does not apply to officials appointed by a general representative body vis-à-vis that representative body if it expressly requests such information. (4) All bodies entrusted with tasks of federal, state, and municipal administration, as well as the bodies of other public corporations, must provide information on matters within their sphere of activity, unless a statutory duty of confidentiality precludes this. Professional associations are only obligated to provide information to their respective members, and only to the extent that this does not impede the proper performance of their statutory duties. The detailed regulations concerning federal bodies and self-government regulated by federal legislation in both legislative and executive matters are a matter for the federal government; those concerning state and municipal bodies and those regulated by state legislation are matters for the federal government. Regarding self-governance: in principle legislation, it is a federal matter; in implementing legislation and in enforcement, it is a state matter. and Article 5a) Democracy, humanity, solidarity, peace and justice, as well as openness and tolerance towards people are fundamental values ​​of the school, on the basis of which it ensures the highest possible level of education for the entire population, regardless of origin, social situation and financial background, while constantly guaranteeing and further developing the best possible quality. Article 78a. (1) The Federal Minister of the Interior is the supreme security authority. The State Police Directorates are subordinate to him, and the District Administrative Authorities are subordinate to them as security authorities. (2) If the life, health, liberty, or property of individuals is currently endangered or is imminent, the security authorities are responsible for providing initial general assistance until the intervention of the competent authority, irrespective of the jurisdiction of another authority to avert the danger. Article 20. (1) (1) Under the direction of the supreme bodies of the Federation and the Länder, elected bodies, appointed professional bodies, or bodies appointed by contract shall conduct the administration in accordance with the provisions of the laws. They are responsible to the bodies superior to them for their official activities and, unless otherwise provided in laws pursuant to paragraph 2, are bound by their instructions. A subordinate body may refuse to follow an instruction if the instruction was issued by an unauthorized body or if compliance would violate criminal law. (2) By law, bodies may be established 1. for expert review, 2. for monitoring compliance with the legality of administration and for monitoring matters relating to public procurement, 3. for making decisions at the highest level, provided they are established collegially, include at least one judge, and their decisions are not subject to administrative appeal or modification, 4. with arbitration, mediation, and advocacy functions, 5. for safeguarding competition and carrying out economic supervision. I feel endangered... and nobody is doing anything! This file has been submitted to the Constitutional Court. Article 139. (1) The Constitutional Court shall rule on the illegality of regulations issued by a federal or state authority upon application by a court, an independent administrative tribunal, or the Federal Procurement Official, but ex officio if the Constitutional Court would have to apply such a regulation in pending legal proceedings. It shall also rule on the illegality of regulations issued by a state authority upon application by the Federal Government, and on the illegality of regulations issued by a federal authority upon application by a state government, and on the illegality of regulations issued by a municipal supervisory authority pursuant to Article 119a, paragraph 6, upon application by the municipality concerned. Furthermore, it shall rule on the illegality of regulations upon application by a person who claims to be directly affected in their rights by such illegality, provided that the regulation has become effective for that person without a judicial decision or the issuance of an official notice; Article 89, paragraph 3, shall apply mutatis mutandis to such applications. The application form for an appointment states: Your rights You have the fundamental rights to information, rectification, erasure, restriction of processing, withdrawal of consent, and objection. If you believe that the processing of your data violates data protection law or that your data protection rights have otherwise been infringed, you can lodge a complaint with the supervisory authority. In Austria, this is the Data Protection Authority. Contact details for the Data Protection Officer and further information on data protection at the Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs (BMEIA) and its representative offices can be found at www.bmeia.gv.at/datenschutz. Reactions Dear Mr. Glanz, Thank you for your email and your trust in our work. Your account is distressing, and we send you our deepest solidarity. Unfortunately, we cannot assist you personally, as we are not a specialized counseling center, do not have experts available for consultation, and may lack the necessary legal expertise. We sincerely regret this. We recommend that you contact the national helpline and/or a local specialized counseling center. We have attached a list of possible contact details. We hope that you receive the help and support you need as soon as possible. Sincerely, Your TERRE DES FEMMES Team The court then has six months to decide on the appeal. The fact that I also consider all of this problematic is irrelevant. The law allows it, in any case. Regarding the application for the "residence permit for family members": If I understand your text correctly, the application was not even accepted by the embassy? If that's the case, your wife should definitely resubmit the application – provided she meets the requirements for a residence permit. If that's not possible because there's no appointment available, your wife should submit the application to the embassy by mail or email, and a request for an in-person interview will then have to be issued. Kind regards, Marriage Without Borders

Karl Glanz, Submission of August 5, 2026, Ref. No. 2026-0.668.700. Dear Mr. Glanz, Regarding your submissions of August 5, 2026, and August 8, 2026, concerning the application for a visa for your spouse, we can only inform you that no proceedings are registered in the database of the Administrative Court for the dates you provided. It should be noted that the Administrative Court has jurisdiction exclusively over appeals against decisions of an administrative court, applications for the setting of deadlines due to a breach of the duty to decide by an administrative court, conflicts of jurisdiction between administrative courts, certain applications from ordinary courts, and certain complaints concerning the alleged violation of rights under the GDPR by the Administrative Court within the judicial sphere (Art. 133 para. 1 B-VG). Outside of the aforementioned area of ​​jurisdiction, the Administrative Court lacks any legal basis to influence the actions or decisions of other authorities or institutions. Since your submission does not contain any request that falls within the jurisdiction of the Administrative Court, it cannot be referred to the Administrative Court for further processing. It is strongly recommended that you refrain from further action.

Translation: Dear Mr. Glanz, Thank you for your message and for submitting the documents (this email and your email of July 29, 2026, at 10:14 a.m.). Please note that regarding your request for confirmation of the cancellation of your insurance, the Embassy does not issue separate justifications for the denial of a visa. The reasons for the refusal were communicated to the applicant in writing by means of a mandate notice. Your submission of September 19, 2025, could not be considered because the request for supplementary documents pursuant to Section 13 Paragraph 3 of the Austrian General Administrative Procedure Act (AVG) (instruction to supplement documents - power of attorney) was not answered within the prescribed time limit. Consequently, the legal remedy mentioned in the notice, within the specified time limits and requirements, was not exercised. Sincerely, Austrian Embassy Nairobi Consular Section LMP

Translation: Dear Sir or Madam, With reference to the email below, we kindly request that you provide us with the following: A clear and complete scan of the passport copies of both applicants. Please also confirm: The type of visa application originally submitted. The date of application. The application or reference number received upon application. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Austrian Embassy Nairobi | Permanent Representation to the UN in Nairobi Consular Department C.S.

Translation: I didn't expect any other answer. You ignore everything anyway. You ignored my wife's objection, apparently intentionally. Now you're spreading falsehoods and I'm spreading the truth. I have the data, the evidence. Here's the promised file. Not the latest version yet, I'm still working on it. https://afrikamonamour.blogspot.com/2026/08/deep-state-osterreich.html Sincerely, Karl Glanz

This letter clearly demonstrates how people are being blocked. It contains nothing new, only familiar information. It's a pre-printed letter where only the name has been inserted. Translation: File number: 2026-0.585.316 Dear Mr. Glanz, Minoritenplatz 8, 1010 Vienna Please send email replies, quoting the file number, to abtiv2@bmeia.gv.at Your reference: PE Vienna, July 10, 2026 Thank you for your letter to the Austrian Foreign Ministry, received on June 23, 2026, which was forwarded to me, Head of the Department for Visa and Residence Affairs at the Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs, for a response. I would first like to assure you that the Austrian diplomatic missions are required to base the examination of every visa application on the legal provisions of the Community Visa Code and the Foreigners Police Act 2005. Visa applicants must submit authentic documents during the application process that meet the requirements for visa issuance. For data protection reasons, it is not permitted to provide detailed information about the background of a specific visa application to persons who are not parties to the proceedings. This background information may only be provided to the applicants themselves or their authorized representatives. Furthermore, due to legal regulations, the headquarters of the Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs is not involved in individual visa procedures and has no authority to issue directives on whether a visa should be granted or refused. In the event of a visa application being rejected, applicants will receive corresponding notifications. An appeal, known as a "presentation," may be filed in writing with the diplomatic mission handling the case within two weeks. This presentation may also be submitted by an authorized representative and is free of charge. During the presentation, applicants are given the opportunity to submit further arguments to address the concerns raised by the diplomatic mission. The mission will then review the application again, taking into account the new arguments, which may include written statements and evidence, additional documents, etc. You will find further information about the procedure in the mandate notice itself (including the email address to which the appeal should be sent). The applicant will be informed as soon as a final decision is reached. However, if the appeal is not filed within the two-week deadline, the procedure is concluded. If the appeal is filed on time and the decision remains negative, visa applicants have the right to appeal the decision to the Federal Administrative Court (BVwG). The exact regulations for this can be found in the notice. The BVwG then decides as the second instance. The deadline for filing the appeal is four weeks from the date of service of the decision. Should this deadline have already expired, visa applicants are free to submit a new application at any time. However, this is only advisable if the circumstances underlying the application have changed or if the embassy's previous concerns can be addressed with appropriate evidence. Since each application constitutes a separate administrative act, the applicant would have to submit all required documents again in the event of a new application. We hope this information has helped to clarify the situation and remain, with kind regards, Ambassador Dr. René Amry (Head of Department IV.2 - Visa, Border, Residence and Asylum Affairs; Migration; Combating Human Trafficking) Electronically generated. When an authority makes a mistake, the appropriate course of action depends on the specific objective: Is the goal to amend the decision (correct its content), or has the error resulted in financial damage? 1. Correction of the Error (Legal Remedies / Procedural Law) If the authority has made an incorrect decision or remained inactive, procedural laws apply: AVG (General Administrative Procedure Act) & VwGVG (Administrative Court Procedure Act): Appeal against a decision (§ 7 VwGVG): This is directed against an incorrect decision. The deadline is generally four weeks from service. Appeal for failure to act (§ 8 VwGVG): If the authority does not respond within the statutory period (usually six months), this can compel a decision from the administrative court. Appeal against measures (§ 130 B-VG): This applies to incorrect direct administrative action without a formal decision (e.g., unlawful police action). BAO (Federal Fiscal Code): Applies to incorrect tax and levy assessments (e.g., by the tax office). The legal remedy of objection/appeal against the assessment usually applies within a one-month deadline. B-VG (Federal Constitutional Law): Allows appeals to the Constitutional Court (VfGH) or the Administrative Court (VwGH) in cases of violations of fundamental rights or unlawful regulations. 2. Financial Damages (Official Liability) If the error has resulted in direct financial damage, the following liability law applies: AHG (Official Liability Act): Governs liability when public officials, in the execution of laws, unlawfully and culpably cause damage. The state (federal, state, or municipal) is liable for its employees. Important: A prerequisite is often the duty to provide assistance (§ 2 para. 2 AHG). Anyone who has failed to pursue a legally available remedy (e.g., an appeal) usually forfeits their right to claim official liability. Before filing a lawsuit, a written demand (§ 8 AHG) must be submitted to the responsible entity. OrgHG (Official Liability Act): If the state has paid for the damage, this law regulates the conditions under which the authority can reclaim the money from the responsible official/employee (recourse in cases of intent or gross negligence). 3. Private Sector Administration If the authority acts like a private company (e.g., renting out municipal housing, awarding contracts, operating hospitals), the Official Liability Act does not apply, but rather general civil law according to the ABGB (General Civil Code). 4. Disciplinary or Criminal Consequences StGB (Criminal Code): If the error was intentional or a pretext for enrichment, offenses such as § 302 StGB (abuse of official authority) apply. BDG (Civil Service Law) / Representation and state laws: Rules governing disciplinary consequences (warning, fine, dismissal) for employees in the public service. If an Austrian citizen invites his wife from Vienna to a third country and she is denied a visa, is this not an act against humanity? And because humanity is enshrined in the constitution, is it not a violation of the constitution? In Austria, the right to private and family life and the protection of marriage and family are legally relevant and must be considered in such decisions. In Austria, human dignity and the protection of marriage and family are recognized, and the right to respect for private and family life is protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The protection of the family is therefore constitutionally and human rights-wise important. The authorities may refuse a visa under the legal conditions, for example, if formal requirements are lacking or other legal grounds exist. Interference with family life is not absolutely prohibited under Article 8 of the ECHR, but is only permissible under strict conditions. This means that a refusal can be lawful, but it must be objectively justified and proportionate. If an Austrian citizen wishes to live with their spouse, a refusal may, under certain circumstances, infringe upon their right to family life and be legally contestable. However, legal remedies or an appeal would only be possible if the authorities violate applicable law, procedural rules, or constitutional or human rights standards. Legal concerns: This decision infringes upon the constitutionally and human rights-protected right to respect for private and family life, in particular under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the relevant fundamental rights protection provisions. As an Austrian citizen, I have a legally protected interest in being able to live with my spouse in marital union. The refusal constitutes a significant infringement of the right to family life and is therefore only permissible if it is based on a clear legal foundation, serves a legitimate public interest, and is proportionate. The personal and family circumstances were not sufficiently considered, and the decision is therefore unlawful or at least flawed in its exercise of discretion. Further points of criticism include: An error should not automatically be held against the accused if the law does not consider it culpable; this is primarily regulated in Section 9 of the Austrian Criminal Code (StGB). Abuse of office, Section 302 of the Austrian Criminal Code (StGB), refers to an abuse of office committed by the Austrian embassy. The decisive factors are intent, the concrete abuse of authority, and the violation of protected rights. 1. Correction of the Error (Legal Remedies / Procedural Law) If an authority has made an incorrect decision or failed to act, procedural laws apply: AVG (General Administrative Procedure Act) & VwGVG (Administrative Court Procedure Act): Appeal against a decision (§ 7 VwGVG): This is directed against an incorrect decision. The deadline is generally four weeks from service. Appeal for failure to act (§ 8 VwGVG): If the authority does not respond within the statutory period (usually six months), this can compel a decision from the Administrative Court. Appeal against an administrative act (§ 130 B-VG): This applies to incorrect direct administrative action without a formal decision (e.g., unlawful police action). * BAO (Federal Fiscal Code): Applies to incorrect tax and levy assessments (e.g., by the tax office). The legal remedy of objection/appeal against the decision usually applies here, with a deadline of one month. Federal Constitutional Law (B-VG): In cases of violations of fundamental rights or unlawful regulations, this allows for recourse to the Constitutional Court (VfGH) or the Administrative Court (VwGH). 2. Financial Compensation (Official Liability) If the error has resulted in direct financial damage, the following liability law applies: Official Liability Act (AHG): This governs liability when public officials, in the execution of laws, unlawfully and culpably cause damage. The state (federal, state, or municipal) is liable for its employees. Important: A prerequisite is often the duty to provide assistance (§ 2 para. 2 AHG). Those who have missed a reasonable legal remedy (e.g., an appeal) usually forfeit their right to claim official liability. Before filing a lawsuit, a written demand for compensation (§ 8 AHG) must be submitted to the responsible authority. Official Liability Act (OrgHG): If the state has paid for the damage, this law regulates the conditions under which the authority can reclaim the money from the responsible official/employee (recourse in cases of intent or gross negligence). 3. Private Sector Administration If the authority acts like a private company (e.g., renting out municipal apartments, awarding contracts, operating hospitals), the Official Liability Act does not apply, but rather general civil law according to the Austrian Civil Code (ABGB). 4. Disciplinary or Criminal Consequences Criminal Code (StGB): If the error was intentional or a pretext for enrichment, offenses such as Section 302 of the Criminal Code (Abuse of Official Authority) apply. Civil Service Law (BDG) / State and Regional Laws: These regulate disciplinary consequences (warning, fine, dismissal) for public sector employees. Voices about the Austrian Embassy in Nairobi/Kenia Extremely disappointing experience. My Kenyan wife, as the spouse of a Hungarian/EU citizen exercising his right of free movement, was refused a visa despite the EU rules protecting family members of EU citizens. Additional documents were demanded and her right to free movement as an EU citizen’s spouse was effectively denied. The decision caused unnecessary financial loss, wasted time and severe stress for both of us. The case has now been referred to SOLVIT (6828/26/HU). Absolutely unacceptable. (from an Hungarian) I have now reported this case to SOLVIT. Your complaint has been registered under the following SOLVIT file number: 7400/26/AT. (The European Commission is the EU’s main executive body. It proposes legislation, upholds EU treaties and ensures Member States apply EU law and policies. The Commission manages the EU's budget and negotiates international agreements on behalf of the EU.)

Let's go through this point by point. Legalizing the marriage certificate. The stamp in the upper left corner wasn't fully visible. Only half of it was there. Accommodation. My perspective: I was at the embassy today, and I would have been surprised if everything had gone smoothly this time. It didn't surprise me that my accommodation didn't meet with your approval. I'd like to clarify what you haven't quite grasped. I bought the apartment in Neudörfl and registered my daughter as the owner. She doesn't live there; she lives in Vienna. You could have seen that if you had looked at the copies. In short, the apartment in Neudörfl is empty. It's perfectly fine if we live there, but the embassy has to approve it; otherwise, nothing can happen! It's also strange that I suddenly need proof of citizenship; my passport isn't sufficient. Perhaps it's a fake passport. If you don't accept the apartment, then return the documents to me. ... Thank you for your emails today at 2:01 p.m. and 2:19 p.m. Unfortunately, the application documents did not clarify the issue of your intended residence in the locality, which is why we have issued a request for clarification. Your wife states in her application that she intends to reside in the apartment at Hauptstraße 140. However, your documents indicate that you are apparently registered at Schickgasse 24/2/18, 1220 Vienna, and that a woman named V. is registered at this address – also evident from the documents you submitted – and that this woman has purchased the aforementioned apartment. However, no connection between you and Ms. V. is known, nor can any link be established between you and your wife and the apartment in Neudörfl. Therefore, we have issued a request for clarification regarding this point, including the submission of relevant documentation. Furthermore, after reviewing the documents again, we can confirm that you are no longer required to submit proof of your citizenship. Finally, please note that you can contact us directly on-site next time to clarify any questions you may have – we are happy to answer any open questions directly. Sincerely, Austrian Embassy Nairobi Consular Section HR I would like to reiterate that I am not registered anywhere in Austria. It is true that I was briefly registered at Schickgasse, but that registration was deleted long ago. I was also registered at Hauptstraße, for much longer than at Schickgasse. I assume you received this information from the Austrian Health and Social Welfare Association (ÖGK). You should check the Central Population Register (ZMR), as it will confirm my information. What particularly strikes Beers here is the fact that the embassy can find "no connection" between Ms. V. and me. Are they that stupid, or is this deliberate? It can be assumed that it is deliberate. A visa for my wife must never be granted—at least not by Austria. The woman is my daughter. You can certainly verify this. I am sending you my daughter's passport; you can see that she is my daughter. Criminal record extract. This is somewhat difficult to obtain in Kenya and through the Austrian Embassy. It is subsidized, but once it is finally issued, it must be certified as valid by the authorities, and this can take time. As soon as you have the documents, there is no appointment available. This can also take time. By the time the appointment finally arrives, the criminal record extract will no longer be valid. The request to amend the record expires in 7 days, which is far too short. Dear Mr. Glanz, Your two letters have been received by the City Information Office. Regarding your application for an entry visa for your wife, we would like to inform you that this falls exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Austrian Embassy in Nairobi. The City of Vienna has no influence on decisions made by embassies. Regarding the authentication of your South African marriage certificate, please contact the South African Embassy in Nairobi. Thank you. Dear Mr. Ganz, Your inquiry has been forwarded by the Federal Ministry of the Interior to the Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum. The Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum is not responsible for the matter you described. We have forwarded your submission to the department responsible for visa matters at the Federal Ministry of the Interior. For further questions, please contact Department V/B/7 at the Federal Ministry of the Interior directly or the German diplomatic mission abroad. Sincerely, Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum Directorate Staff Department/Central Chancellery Dear Mr. Glanz, Gaby Schwarz, Ombudsman, File Number: 2026-0.664.337 (VA/BD-AA/B-1), Date: September 15, 2026. Regrettably, you did not comply with the request to specify your complaint and instead sent the Ombudsman's Office a 222-page email in a difficult-to-read format, consisting of your own statements mixed with past correspondence with the Ombudsman's Office in Nairobi. However, I have since been able to find and review some documents on the website you created, "Africa: Deep State Austria." These documents show, firstly, that the Austrian Embassy in Nairobi refused your wife a visa by order dated September 18, 2025. You (or your wife) then wrote "I hereby lodge an appeal" by hand on a single line and subsequently received a request for rectification from the Austrian Embassy in Nairobi on August 31, 2025, which you apparently did not comply with, or at least not within the deadline. According to Section 13 Paragraph 3 of the Austrian General Administrative Procedure Act (AVG), deficiencies in written submissions do not authorize the authority to reject them. Rather, the authority must, ex officio, immediately initiate the rectification process and may order the applicant to rectify the deficiency within a reasonable period, with the effect that the submission will be rejected if this period expires without result. If the deficiency is rectified in a timely manner, the submission is deemed to have been submitted correctly from the outset. According to poaragraph 4, paragraph 3 applies mutatis mutandis in cases of doubt regarding the identity of the applicant or the authenticity of a submission, with the proviso that the submission is deemed withdrawn after the deadline has expired without result. The information on the website further indicates that you also contacted the Austrian Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs (BMEIA) by letter dated June 23, 2026, to which you have already received a detailed reply (the date of the BMEIA's letter is not included in the document on the website). It appears that your wife now has another in-person appointment at the Austrian Embassy in Nairobi on October 5, 2026. I consider this a positive sign. I can only advise your wife to reconfirm the appointment proposed by the Austrian Embassy in Nairobi and to attend it, submitting all required documents: Entry and Residence Permit for Austria – Austrian Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs (BMEIA) Residence Permit – Austrian Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs (BMEIA) Visa – Austrian Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs (BMEIA) Given the ongoing proceedings, I cannot take any further action. Sincerely, Dr. Michael Mauerer (signed) Dear Mr. Glanz, Gaby Schwarz, Ombudsman; Reference No.: 2026-0.664.337 (VA/BD-AA/B-1); Date: September 18, 2026. I have received your latest communication and have contacted the BMEIA regarding the handwritten letter dated September 23, 2026, containing the wording "I hereby lodge an appeal." I will get in touch with you again as soon as I have received the requested response. Regarding the ongoing proceedings, I once again advise your wife to confirm the appointment proposed by the Austrian Embassy in Nairobi for October 5, 2026, and to attend it with all the required documents. I am unable to take further action in the ongoing proceedings due to a lack of jurisdiction. Sincerely, Dear Mr. Glanz, The application, along with the explanations you provided, has already been forwarded to the competent domestic authority. Please contact the competent domestic authority directly regarding any additional documents to be submitted with the application. Yours sincerely, Austrian Embassy Nairobi | Permanent Representation to the UN in Nairobi Consular Department I went to the South African embassy to get an apostille. The lady there was confused, because the marriage certificate already had an apostille on it! I got so furious that I tore up the marriage certificate. Apparently, there is no one there who knows anything about apostilles. The lady was kind enough to salvage what could be saved. Now the marriage certificate has been certified as well. I don't know what good that’s supposed to do; she won't get a visa because of it anyway. Before that, I went to the registry office and had the marriage entered into the civil status register. So, all their requirements have been met. It won't help, but it is good to have confirmation. The documents are attached. Kind regards, Karl Glanz https://www.emn.at/sites/default/files/2025/07/emn-austria-family-reunification-of-third-country-nationals-in-austria.pdf https://www.vfgh.gv.at/verfassungsgerichtshof/rechtsgrundlagen/fundamental_rights.en.html https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/fachinfos/publikationen/Unsere-Rechte-Grund-und-Freiheitsrechte-in-Oesterreich_2026.pdf https://www.konvent.gv.at/K/DE/AVORL-K/AVORL-K_00313/fnameorig_017399.html https://www.konvent.gv.at/K/DE/AVORL-K/AVORL-K_00310/fnameorig_017395.html https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/fachinfos/publikationen/unsere_Rechte_Grundrechte_231123.pdf https://linda.lindeverlag.at/Dokument/76835_8/ https://www.emn.at/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/emn-austria-family-reunification-of-third-country-nationals-in-austria.pdf https://charter.humanrights.at/article https://www.konvent.gv.at/K/DE/PRVOR-K/PRVOR-K_00054/imfname_037464.pdf https://www.migration.gv.at/index.php?id=50 https://www.emn.at/sites/default/files/2025/07/emn-osterreich-familienzusammenfuhrung-von-drittstaatsangehorigen-in-osterreich.pdf https://www.migration.gv.at/en/types-of-immigration/permanent-immigration/family-reunification/ https://help.unhcr.org/austria/de/family-reunification-2/wenn-sie-anerkannter-fluchtling-sind/ https://meinefamilie.roteskreuz.at/de/unterstuetzerinnen/verfahren/wie-kann-die-familienzusammenfuehrung-beantragt-werden/ https://www.asyl.at/archiv-2022/de/themen/familienzusammenfuehrung/index.html https://www.bmeia.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/Vertretungen/Kiew/Merkblaetter/Aufenthaltstitel/Merkblatt_Familienzusammenfuehrung_02.docx https://www.wien.gv.at/video/4374/Drittstaatsangehoerige-Familienzusammenfuehrung https://www.wien.gv.at/zusammenleben/einwanderung-aufenthalt-familie https://www.migration.gv.at/de/formen-der-zuwanderung/dauerhafte-zuwanderung/familienzusammenfuehrung/familienzusammenfuehrung-leichter-lesen/