Intervention management

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interventional administration refers to a type of public administration , through whose activity the the citizens and other entities a Tun , toleration or omission gives up and thus in the fundamental right to act at will , or not to act through the use of coercion is engaged. What is important here is the unrestricted precedence and reservation of the law, so that an intervention administration only acts lawfully if the act occurs on the basis of a legal authorization. If this happens differently, Article 20, paragraph 3 of the Basic Law is violated.

The concept of intervention management in Germany is generally perceived for authorities with the classic form of action to avert danger . Their scope of competence therefore includes prohibitive, imperative, threatening or applying administrative action, the legally binding effects of which are mainly directed outwards through burdensome administrative acts. In general, however, it is not used to characterize a specific act, but rather to also denote or emphasize the “ intervening ” aspect of a specific administrative act. The opposite term to this is performance administration (also called performing administration ).

An example: A property owner is obliged to fell a tree on the side of the road on his property because it is no longer stable and there is a risk that it could fall into the public street space.

Since the police are part of the general administration, their task of investigating criminal offenses results in a further area of ​​encroachment on fundamental rights: criminal procedural measures under the Code of Criminal Procedure .

Due to its dual-function task - hazard prevention and criminal investigation - the police have therefore developed the legal subject right of intervention , in which above all problems are dealt with, which are due to the same appearance of the intervention measure to avert danger and to investigate criminal offenses (e.g. search for the Police Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure). In this context, preventive action is often used to distinguish it from repressive action. The legal process to be followed in the event of a complaint against police action depends on the type of action. In the case of preventive action, the administrative jurisdiction is generally responsible, while repressive action according to § 23 EGGVG is to be attacked through the ordinary court process.

In summary, it can therefore be stated:

  • If a measure of the administration encroaches on the rights of legal persons, one speaks of intervention administration.
  • The right of intervention is part of the intervention management. It interferes with the rights of third parties.


  • Martin Bürmann: The suspicion of danger. Bearing costs in intervention management . Logos Verlag, Berlin 2002, ISBN 978-3832500610 .
  • Hans Otto Freitag: Customary Law and Legal System: A legal-theoretical and constitutional investigation into customary law, especially in the management of interference . 1st edition, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1976, ISBN 978-3-428-03814-5 .
  • Michael Neupert : Legality and expediency: The frame-picture model of the administrative court control density in the intervention management . 1st edition, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2011, ISBN 978-3161508929 .
  • Hermann Soell: The discretion of the intervention management. At the same time a study on judicial discretionary control in antitrust law and on the importance of détournement de pouvoir in French administrative and European community law . Carl Winter, Heidelberg 1973, ISBN 978-3825322014 .

Individual evidence

  1. Prof. Dr. jur. Rolf Schmidt: General Administrative Law - Basics of Administrative Procedure - State Liability Law . 20th edition. Verlag rs, Hamburg 2017, ISBN 978-3-86651-193-4 , p. 6 .
  2. Bettina Plöger-Heeg, Marita Hasebrink: General Administrative Law . Kommunal- und Schul-Verlag, Wiesbaden 2015, p. 22 ISBN 978-3-8293-1181-6