Termination of Criminal Prosecution followed by the Imposition of Duties and Regulations on the Accused as an Alternative Way to Resolve a Criminal Law Conflict in the German Criminal Procedure

Given the Russian tendency to expand the scope of non-rehabilitating grounds for termination of criminal prosecution/case, the paper examines the legal regulation and law enforcement practice of termination of criminal prosecution with the imposition of various duties and regulations to the accused as one of the alternative ways to resolve a criminal conflict within the framework of the German criminal procedure. The German criminal procedure has a lot in common with the Russian one; both are formed on the principle of lawfulness, or legality. At present, both Russian and German legislators are looking for alternative ways, in addition to procedural coercion or the threat of its use, to resolve the conflict in the process, which contribute to the humanization of criminal legislation, reducing the number of convicts, procedural economy. One of such alternatives in the German criminal procedure is the termination of criminal prosecution followed by the imposition of duties and regulations on the accused. The possibility of termination of criminal prosecution on this basis is provided not only in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Federal Republic of Germany, but also in various sectoral laws, for example, the German Narcotics Law, the German Youth Court Law. An analysis of the statistical data of the Federal Statistical Office in Germany from 2016 to 2020 on the termination of criminal prosecution followed by the imposition of certain duties and regulations to the accused shows the priorities of the German law enforcement officer in terms of choosing individual duties assigned to the accused and, if properly performed, entailing the termination of criminal prosecution. Despite the wide choice of duties and regulations, the law enforcement officer mainly uses the few duties imposed on the accused in order to terminate criminal prosecution. However, the very possibility of a wide choice of potentially possible duties and regulations indicates an individualized approach to the participants of the criminal law conflict in the German criminal procedure, which makes it possible to take into account the interests of all parties to the conflict.

1. Golovnenkov PV, Spitsa N. Ugolovno-protsessualyy kodeks FRG: nauchno-prakticheskiy kommentariy i perevod teksta zakona [Criminal Procedure Code of the Federal Republic of Germany: Scientific and practical commentary and translation of the law]. Potsdam; 2012. (In Russ.).

2. Golovenkov PV. Ugolovnoe ulozhenie Federativnoy Respubliki Germaniya: nauchno-prakticheskiy kommentariy i perevod teksta zakona [Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Germany: Scientific and practical commentary and translation of the law]. Potsdam; 2021. (In Russ.).

3. Golovko LV, editor. Kurs ugolovnogo protsessa [The course of the criminal procedure]. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2017. (In Russ.).

4. Beulke W, Swoboda S. Strafprozessrecht. 15 Auflage. 2020.

5. Kaspar J, Weiler E, Schlickum G. Der Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich. München; 2014.

6. Becker J-P, Erb V, Essser R, Graalmann-Scheerer K, Hilger H, Ignor A, editors. Löwe-Rosenberg Großkommentar. Die Strafprozeßordnung und das Gerichtsverfasssungsgesetz. Band 5. 27 Auflage. Berlin; 2020.

7. Wolter J, editor. Systematischer Kommentar zur Strafprozessordnung: SK-StPO mit GVG und EMRK. Band III. 5 Auflage. 2016.