Code of Criminal Procedure of Federal Republic of Germany (1950, as amended 2014) (excerpts related to Violence against Women and Domestic Violence) (English)
THE GERMAN CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
[...]
CHAPTER VII
DECISION CONCERNING AN ORDER OF PREVENTIVE DETENTION RESERVED IN THE JUDGMENT OR A SUBSEQUENT ORDER OF PREVENTIVE DETENTION
Section 275a
[Decision Concerning Reserved or Subsequent Orders of Preventive Detention]
(1) Where the order of preventive detention has been reserved in the judgment (section 66a of the Criminal Code), the executing authority shall send the files in good time to the public prosecution office of the competent court. The public prosecution office shall hand over the files to the presiding judge of the court in time for a decision to be given by the time stated in subsection (5). Where placement in a psychiatric hospital has been declared disposed of pursuant to section 67d subsection (6), first sentence, of the Criminal Code, the executing authority shall send the files without delay to the public prosecution office of the court competent to make a subsequent order of preventive detention (section 66b of the Criminal Code). If the public prosecution office intends to apply for a subsequent order of preventive detention, it shall notify the affected person thereof. The public prosecution office shall submit its application for a subsequent order of preventive detention without delay and shall hand it over to the presiding judge with the files.
(2) Subject to any contrary provisions below, Sections 213 to 275 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the preparation and conduct of the main hearing.
(3) After commencement of the main hearing in accordance with Section 243 subsection (1), a rapporteur shall report in the absence of the witnesses on the results of the proceedings up to that point. The presiding judge shall read out the previous judgment, insofar as it is of relevance for the decision on the reserved or subsequent order of preventive detention. Thereafter the convicted person shall be examined and the evidence taken.
(4) Prior to arriving at a decision the court shall obtain an expert’s opinion. Where a decision is to be taken as to whether a subsequent order of preventive detention is to be made, two expert’s opinions shall be obtained. The experts may not be persons who have been involved in the treatment of the convicted person in relation to the imprisonment or placement.
(5) The court shall give a decision on the reserved order of preventive detention not later than six months before full execution of the prison sentence.
(6) Where there are cogent reasons to assume that preventive detention will be subsequently ordered, the court may issue a placement order until the judgment becomes final. The court competent to decide pursuant to section 67d subsection (6) of the Criminal Code shall remain responsible for the issue of the placement order until the application for an order of subsequent preventive detention is received by the court responsible for this decision. In the cases referred to in section 66a of the Criminal Code, the court may issue a placement order until the judgment becomes final if it ordered reserved preventive detention at first instance prior to the time specified in section 66a subsection (3), first sentence, of the Criminal Code. Sections 114 to 115a, 117 to 119a and 126a subsection (3) shall apply mutatis mutandis.
[...]