Scholarlink

<p>Preventive detention (Section&#xa0;66 of the German Criminal Code, StGB) is typically imposed following severe and repeated violent or sexual offenses; however, the legislature also recognizes ideological extremism as a&#xa0;potential basis for preventive detention and recently reaffirmed this with a&#xa0;change in law in 2017; however, the established criteria for assessing a&#xa0;propensity under Section&#xa0;66 StGB, derived from general violent and sexual offending, are only partially applicable to extremist-motivated offenses. Often, these offenders appear in the criminal justice system for the first time, albeit in particularly severe cases; the existing catalogue of criteria does not capture the central motivational factor of radicalization. The article is based on all forensic psychiatric expert opinions and judgments of German higher regional courts from the past 10 years (date of query: June 2024) in which the imposition of preventive detention for extremist-motivated offenders was seriously considered. The expert opinions and judgments were made available to the authors by the Federal Prosecutor General at the Federal Court of Justice (GBA). In addition, an oral expert opinion from 2025 and 2 written forensic psychiatric opinions prepared by the author (J.F.) on behalf of the GBA, including their oral presentation and the associated judgments from 2025, were analyzed. Based on the identified expert and judicial argumentation structures, the article derives criteria that may serve as supraindividual indicators of so-called propensity to commit crimes under § 66StGB for extremist-motivated offenders. The findings show that ideological radicalization, combined with hostility towards enemy groups and a&#xa0;propensity for violence, represents a&#xa0;key perpetrator-related propensity criterion. Longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses can indicate that radicalization constitutes an “ingrained inner state” in the legal sense of propensity, even in first-time offenders. It also aligns with other propensity criteria established by Habermeyer and Saß (<CitationRef CitationID="CR21">2004</CitationRef>), although sometimes based on different underlying factors. Within the extremist-motivated cohort, manifestations range from high to low ideological coherence. Further longitudinal research is required to validate the identified criteria.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Zur Begründung der Hangtäterschaft gemäß § 66 StGB bei extremistisch motivierten Straftätern

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月16日

查看全文
  • Inga Drachenberg,
  • Norbert Leygraf,
  • Johannes Fuß

摘要

Preventive detention (Section 66 of the German Criminal Code, StGB) is typically imposed following severe and repeated violent or sexual offenses; however, the legislature also recognizes ideological extremism as a potential basis for preventive detention and recently reaffirmed this with a change in law in 2017; however, the established criteria for assessing a propensity under Section 66 StGB, derived from general violent and sexual offending, are only partially applicable to extremist-motivated offenses. Often, these offenders appear in the criminal justice system for the first time, albeit in particularly severe cases; the existing catalogue of criteria does not capture the central motivational factor of radicalization. The article is based on all forensic psychiatric expert opinions and judgments of German higher regional courts from the past 10 years (date of query: June 2024) in which the imposition of preventive detention for extremist-motivated offenders was seriously considered. The expert opinions and judgments were made available to the authors by the Federal Prosecutor General at the Federal Court of Justice (GBA). In addition, an oral expert opinion from 2025 and 2 written forensic psychiatric opinions prepared by the author (J.F.) on behalf of the GBA, including their oral presentation and the associated judgments from 2025, were analyzed. Based on the identified expert and judicial argumentation structures, the article derives criteria that may serve as supraindividual indicators of so-called propensity to commit crimes under § 66StGB for extremist-motivated offenders. The findings show that ideological radicalization, combined with hostility towards enemy groups and a propensity for violence, represents a key perpetrator-related propensity criterion. Longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses can indicate that radicalization constitutes an “ingrained inner state” in the legal sense of propensity, even in first-time offenders. It also aligns with other propensity criteria established by Habermeyer and Saß (2004), although sometimes based on different underlying factors. Within the extremist-motivated cohort, manifestations range from high to low ideological coherence. Further longitudinal research is required to validate the identified criteria.