Review of papers

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The inspection of papers is a criminal procedural measure in searches in the preliminary investigation .

The statutory regulation can be found in Section 110 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure .

Review reservation for the investigating authorities

Section 110 (1) and (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure allow only the public prosecutor's office or their investigators to inspect against the will of the person concerned. According to the previous view, electronic storage media have always been included in the scope of the regulation. The legislature has expressly confirmed this with the provision in Paragraph 3 (which has been in force since January 1st, 2008). As electronic media, computer units such as notebooks can also be affected if the data carrier cannot be taken separately for inspection. Taking it with you does not constitute confiscation .

Incidentally, printed works are not considered "paper" in the sense of the regulation.

Right of attendance

The person affected by the inspection measure can be permitted to be present during the inspection. Possibly. the person concerned must also be allowed to be present for constitutional reasons.

Remedy

Up until then , the application for a court decision in accordance with Section 98 (2) StPO was already applicable as a legal remedy against being taken along for inspection , because the inspection of the papers is part of the search. The regulation of paragraph 3 (last half-sentence) also confirms this for electronic media.

Serious violations of the provisions of Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can result in a ban on the use of the evidence obtained.

criticism

The German regulation on the inspection of papers was heavily criticized in the literature. In particular, the transfer of responsibility to the investigating judge was requested. The data subject's interest in secrecy speaks for this.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ cf. BGH NStZ 2003, 670.
  2. ↑ cf. Federal Constitutional Court NJW 2005, 1917.
  3. ↑ cf. Knauer / Wolf NJW 2004, 2937; Summer AnwBl. 2004, 507

literature