The Strafprozessordnung, usually abbreviated StPO, is Germany’s Code of Criminal Procedure. It governs every stage of a criminal case, from the moment police learn of a suspected offense through the final appeal, and it fixes what prosecutors must do, what courts can order, and what protections an accused person holds against the state. Because Germany follows a civil-law tradition, the StPO reads less like a collection of case-driven rules and more like a step-by-step instruction manual for the justice system.1Gesetze im Internet. German Code of Criminal Procedure
Who Decides to Prosecute
The starting rule is mandatory prosecution, the Legalitätsprinzip. Under § 152, the public prosecutor is legally required to open an investigation whenever there is enough factual basis to suspect a crime. Prosecutors cannot look the other way because a case is inconvenient or expensive. If the evidence of a prosecutable offense exists, the state must act.2Gesetze im Internet. Strafprozessordnung 152 – Anklagebehörde; Legalitätsgrundsatz
The principle is not absolute. For minor offenses where the accused bears little guilt and no public interest demands prosecution, § 153 lets the prosecutor drop the case with court approval. Section 153a goes further: the prosecutor can conditionally dismiss a case by requiring the accused to pay restitution to the victim, donate to a charitable organization, perform community service, or complete therapy or social-skills training. Meet the conditions within the deadline and the case is permanently closed. Fall short and prosecution resumes.1Gesetze im Internet. German Code of Criminal Procedure
Only the state brings criminal charges. Victims do not personally prosecute crimes in Germany, though they have significant participatory rights discussed below. The decision to charge always belongs to the public prosecutor, who acts on behalf of the public interest rather than on behalf of any individual.
Judicial decision-making rests on the presumption of innocence and the standard known as in dubio pro reo. A judge cannot convict when reasonable doubt about guilt remains. Every element of the alleged offense must be proven, and that standard shapes how judges weigh evidence, question witnesses, and write their reasoning.
Which Court Hears Which Case
Germany’s criminal courts are tiered, and the expected severity of the sentence decides which court hears a case at first instance. The structure itself comes from the Courts Constitution Act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz, or GVG) rather than the StPO.3Gesetze im Internet. Courts Constitution Act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz)
- A single criminal judge (Strafrichter) sits at the local court (Amtsgericht) and handles minor offenses where no more than two years of imprisonment is expected.
- A court with lay judges (Schöffengericht), also at the local court, handles medium-severity cases where a sentence of two to four years is anticipated. A professional judge sits alongside two lay judges from the community.
- A criminal division (Strafkammer) at the regional court (Landgericht) handles serious offenses where more than four years is expected, or where the prosecutor elevates the case due to its particular significance.
- A higher regional court (Oberlandesgericht) handles offenses against the security of the state, such as terrorism or espionage.
The local court cannot impose a sentence exceeding four years, order placement in a psychiatric hospital, or impose preventive detention. If those outcomes appear likely during proceedings, the case must be transferred upward.3Gesetze im Internet. Courts Constitution Act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz)
What Rights the Accused Has
Before any interrogation, authorities must tell the accused what offense they are suspected of and which criminal provisions apply. The accused has the right to remain silent and cannot be compelled to make any statement about the charges. These protections, rooted in § 136, must be communicated before questioning starts; a confession obtained without this advisement runs into serious admissibility problems.1Gesetze im Internet. German Code of Criminal Procedure
The right to a defense attorney attaches at every stage, including the first police interview. Under § 137, the accused can choose their own lawyer and consult with them at any point.
When Defense Counsel Is Mandatory
Section 140 lists situations where the law requires a lawyer rather than merely permitting one. The list covers more ground than many people expect:
- Any case heard at the regional court or higher, or any case involving a serious criminal offense (Verbrechen, meaning one carrying a minimum of one year’s imprisonment).
- When the accused is being brought before a judge for a detention decision or is already held in custody by court order.
- When placement in a facility is being considered to evaluate the accused’s mental condition.
- When the accused has a visual, hearing, or speech impairment, or when the complexity of the case makes self-representation inadequate.
If any of these conditions apply and the accused has not retained a lawyer, the court appoints one. The appointment is not optional. The proceeding cannot move forward without defense counsel present.
How a Case Is Investigated
The preliminary investigation (Ermittlungsverfahren) begins when police or the prosecutor learn of a suspected crime and runs until either the case is dismissed or a formal indictment is filed. The public prosecutor directs the investigation. Police do the fieldwork, interviewing witnesses, collecting evidence, and executing search warrants, but they operate under the prosecutor’s authority.
German prosecutors are not adversaries in the way common-law systems sometimes frame them. The code requires the prosecutor to collect evidence favoring the accused just as diligently as evidence of guilt. If the evidence gathered does not provide sufficient grounds for charges, § 170(2) requires the prosecutor to close the case. The accused must be notified of the dismissal if they were formally questioned as a suspect or if an arrest warrant was issued against them.
Where the evidence points to a high probability of conviction, the prosecutor prepares a formal indictment (Anklageschrift). This document identifies the accused, describes the alleged conduct, specifies which provisions of the criminal code were violated, and lists the evidence and witnesses the prosecution intends to present.
Searches and Seizures
Searches of a suspect’s home or other premises generally require a judicial warrant. Without one, a search is permitted only when there is imminent danger, meaning evidence would likely be destroyed by the time a judge could issue an order. The search must also be proportionate to the seriousness of the offense.
Searching the premises of a third party who is not suspected of the crime faces a higher bar. Under § 103, the search is only permitted when specific facts suggest the evidence sought is located there. A vague hunch is not enough.
When Pre-Trial Detention Is Allowed
Pre-trial detention (Untersuchungshaft) is one of the most consequential powers the state holds, and the StPO treats it accordingly. A judge may order detention only when two conditions are met: the accused is strongly suspected of having committed the offense, and at least one statutory ground for arrest exists.
Section 112 recognizes three grounds for arrest. The accused has already fled or is in hiding. Circumstances suggest the accused will evade the proceedings. Or the accused’s conduct creates a strong suspicion that they will destroy, alter, or suppress evidence, or improperly influence witnesses or co-defendants.
Section 112a allows detention to prevent repeat offenses, but only for specific serious crimes including sexual offenses, violent crimes, and certain drug offenses. Even then, detention under this ground cannot last longer than one year.
Proportionality acts as a hard ceiling across all grounds. Detention may not be ordered if it would be disproportionate to the expected sentence. Under § 121, pre-trial detention for the same offense cannot exceed six months unless the higher regional court specifically authorizes an extension based on the unusual difficulty or scope of the investigation. After six months, the arrest warrant must be revoked unless the court finds compelling justification to continue.
From Indictment to Judgment
The Intermediate Proceeding
Once the indictment is filed, the case enters the intermediate proceeding (Zwischenverfahren), governed by §§ 199 through 211. A judge reviews the prosecution’s case to decide whether there is enough evidence to justify a full trial. The accused receives a copy of the indictment and can respond with objections, submit evidence, or request additional investigation. Weak or insufficiently supported cases get filtered out here, before the burden of a main hearing.4Gesetze im Internet. Strafprozessordnung 199 – Entscheidung über die Eröffnung des Hauptverfahrens
If the judge finds that conviction is more probable than acquittal, they issue an opening order (Eröffnungsbeschluss). If not, the judge refuses to open the main proceedings, though the prosecution can seek to reopen the case later if new evidence emerges.
The Main Hearing
The main hearing (Hauptverhandlung) is the core of the criminal process. The judge opens the session by verifying the accused’s identity, then the prosecutor reads the indictment aloud. What follows differs significantly from adversarial systems: the judge, not the attorneys, leads the questioning of defendants and witnesses. The goal is finding the truth of the matter rather than letting two sides battle.
The accused must be present. German law does not permit trials in absentia for the main hearing, except in narrow circumstances. After the evidence is examined and witnesses heard, the prosecutor delivers closing arguments, followed by the defense. The accused always gets the last word before the court retires to deliberate.
The judgment can be a conviction, an acquittal, or a dismissal. A conviction must include written reasoning explaining how the court evaluated the evidence and arrived at the sentence. That written judgment forms the basis for any later appeal.
The Penal Order
Not every case goes to a full hearing. For minor offenses (Vergehen), the prosecutor can apply under § 407 for a penal order (Strafbefehl), asking the court to impose a sentence based on the case file alone. The judge reviews the evidence on paper and, if satisfied, issues the order without any courtroom proceedings.
The penalties available through a penal order are limited. The court can impose fines, driving bans of up to two years, warnings with sentence reserved, or forfeiture of assets. Imprisonment of up to one year is possible only if the accused has a defense attorney and the sentence is suspended on probation. Anything harsher requires a full trial.
Here is where many people trip up. A penal order becomes legally binding if the accused does not object within two weeks of receiving it. An unopposed penal order carries the same weight as a judgment after trial. Anyone who receives one should treat the deadline seriously, because once it passes the conviction stands.
Negotiated Agreements
Germany introduced a formal framework for plea negotiations in 2009 through § 257c. The court can propose an agreement with the prosecution and defense on the expected sentence range, typically in exchange for a confession. The German version comes with constraints that would surprise anyone familiar with the American model.
The verdict of guilt itself cannot be negotiated. Nor can measures like psychiatric commitment or preventive detention. The court announces the proposed sentencing range, and both prosecution and defense must agree before the deal takes effect. Every step of the negotiation, including informal discussions outside the courtroom, must be documented in the trial record. If the court later determines that important facts were overlooked or the accused’s behavior departs from what was expected, the court can withdraw from the agreement entirely. In that scenario, the confession cannot be used against the accused.
What Evidence the Court Can Use
German courts must rely on the most direct evidence available. If a witness saw the event, they testify in person; the court cannot substitute a written police summary of what the witness said. This principle of immediacy (Unmittelbarkeitsprinzip) lets the judge observe demeanor, ask follow-up questions, and assess credibility firsthand.
Witnesses have a general duty to appear and testify when summoned, though the code carves out exceptions for close family members and professionals bound by confidentiality. Expert witnesses can be called to interpret technical or scientific evidence, and the court itself can conduct on-site inspections of locations or objects connected to the crime.
Prohibited Interrogation Methods
Section 136a draws a hard line around how authorities may obtain statements. Physical mistreatment, induced exhaustion, administering drugs, hypnosis, torture, deception through outright lies, and threats of actions not permitted by law are categorically banned. Any technique that impairs the accused’s ability to think and decide rationally is prohibited.
The consequence is absolute. A confession obtained through any banned method is inadmissible, even if the accused later consents to its use. There is no harmless-error exception.
How Victims Participate
Although the state controls prosecution, victims are far from sidelined. The StPO gives them two distinct tools.
Private Accessory Prosecution
For certain serious offenses, the victim can join the proceedings as a private accessory prosecutor (Nebenkläger). This status grants the right to attend the entire trial, question witnesses, challenge evidence, and make closing arguments alongside the public prosecutor. Section 395 grants this right automatically for victims of sexual offenses, attempted murder, serious bodily harm, kidnapping, stalking, and certain intellectual property crimes.
Close relatives of a person killed through an unlawful act, including children, parents, siblings, or a spouse, can also join as accessory prosecutors. For offenses not on the automatic list, such as insult or simple property crimes, the court may grant participation if the severity of the consequences warrants it.
Civil Claims Within the Criminal Trial
Victims can also pursue civil compensation inside the criminal trial rather than filing a separate lawsuit. Under § 403, the injured person or their heir may bring a property claim arising from the criminal offense. The application can be filed in writing or stated orally during the hearing before closing arguments begin.
If the accused is convicted, the court can grant the compensation claim in the same judgment, and that decision is enforceable just like a civil court ruling. The court may decline to rule on the claim if doing so would significantly delay the criminal proceedings, in which case the victim still has the option of pursuing a separate civil action.
How Judgments Are Appealed
German law provides two distinct paths for challenging a criminal judgment, and the difference between them matters.
- An appeal on facts and law (Berufung) is available against judgments of the local court. The case goes to the regional court for an entirely new trial, where both the facts and the legal analysis are reconsidered from scratch. New evidence can be introduced, and the appellate court makes its own independent findings.
- An appeal on law only (Revision) is available against first-instance judgments of the regional court or higher regional court, and against appellate decisions from the Berufung stage. The reviewing court examines only whether the trial court made legal errors. It does not hear new evidence or reconsider the facts. If it finds a legal error that affected the outcome, it typically sends the case back for a new trial.
Both types of appeal must be filed within one week after the judgment is pronounced. If the accused was absent when judgment was delivered, the deadline begins when they receive formal notice. Missing the one-week window forfeits the right to appeal, and courts enforce this deadline strictly.
The practical consequence of this structure is that judgments from local courts get two layers of review, first a full retrial and then a legal-error check, while judgments from regional courts go straight to the legal-error stage. Someone convicted at a Landgericht for a serious crime never gets a second chance to present their version of the facts to a fresh panel of judges, which makes the first trial all the more consequential.