¹ M. v. Germany, judgement of 17 December 2009. 5^th Section, App. no. 19359/04, p. 27, para. 133.Google Scholar

² v. Liszt, Der Zweckgedanke im Strafrecht, 3 Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (ZStW) 1–47 (1883).Google Scholar

³ Preventive detention came into force in Sweden in 1927, The Netherlands in 1929, Norway in 1929, former Yugoslavia in 1929, Italy in 1930, Denmark in 1930, Belgium in 1930, Poland in 1932 and Finland in 1932, see, Bundestagsdrucksache 13/2859, p. 3.Google Scholar

⁴ See, Köhler, Die Aufhebung der Sicherungsmaβregeln durch die Strafgerechtigkeit, in: Festschrift für Günther Jakobs zum 70. Geburtstag 281 (Pawlik/Zaczyk ed., 2007).Google Scholar

⁵ Kinzig, Die Legalbewährung gefährlicher Rückfalltäter (2008), at 109.Google Scholar

⁶ Federal Statistical Office (Statistisches Bundesamt) Fachserie 10 Reihe 4.1, 2010: https://www-ec.destatis.de/csp/shop/sfg/bpm.html. cBroker.cls?CSPCHD=00500001000048auyhlA00000081paYbJYmA7ILOqvNWZdg&cmspath=struktur,vollanzeige.csp&ID=1025820, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

⁷ For details of the quantity of preventive detention inmates see, the Federal Statistical Office of Germany (supra, note 6).Google Scholar

⁸ Gesetz zur Bekämpfung von Sexualdelikten und sonstigen gefährlichen Straftaten, Bundesgesetzblatt 26 January 1998, part I no. 6, at 160: http://www.afane-iacquart.com/docs/2009/12/gesetz-zur-bekampfung-von-sexualdelikten-und-anderen-gefahrlichen-straftaten.pdf, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

⁹ See, the Federal Statistical Office of Germany (supra, note 6).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Schüler-Springorum, Rechtliche Konsequenzen bei gefährlichen Taetern?, Recht und Psychiatrie 25 (1998).Google Scholar

¹¹ See, p. 3 of the Statistic for Criminal Offences of the German Federal Office of Criminal Investigation (Polizeiliche Kriminalstatistik) 2009, Zeitreihe 1987 BIS 2009, Grundtabelle 01, Bundeskriminalamt Wiesbaden: http://www.bka.de/pks/zeitreihen/pdf/t01.pdf, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

¹² Ministry of Justice, press release of 9 June 2010: http://www.bmj.bund.de/enid/1d77f07859ce2551b7bee2c2d9d7f23d,2c9bda706d635f6964092d0936383939093a0979656172092d0932303130093a096d6f6e7468092d093036093a095f7472636964092d0936383939/Pressestelle/Pressemitteilungen58.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

¹³ Böllinger/Pollähne, Nomos Kommentar Strafgesetzbuch (3. ed., 2010), § 66b para. 3.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Critically: Hassemer/Kargl, Nomos Kommentar Strafgesetzbuch (supra, note 13), § 2 para. 60.Google Scholar

¹⁵ In contrast to the Parole Board of England and Wales the executive courts of Germany are special chambers of the judiciary body and consist of judges only.Google Scholar

¹⁶ BVerfGE 109, 133 – 2 BvR 2029/01, Decision of 5 February 2004: http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/rs200402052bvr202901.html, last accessed 22 September 2010. For further information see, Dünkel/van Zyl Smit, Preventive Detention of Dangerous Offenders Re-examined: A Comment on two decisions of the German Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG – 2 BvR 2029/01 of 5 February 2004 and BVerfG – 2 BvR 834/02 – 2 BvR 1588/02 of 10 February 2004) and the Federal Draft Bill on Preventive Detention of 9 March 2004, 5 German Law Journal 619 (2004): http://www.germanlawjournal.com/pdfs/Vol05No06/PDFVol05No06619-637PublicDuenkelvanZylSmit.pdf.Google Scholar

¹⁷ BVerfGE 109, 133 (supra, note 16).Google Scholar

¹⁸ For further information see, Dűkel/van Zyl Smit (supra, note 16), at 622.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Reading as follows: “Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law: the lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competent court (…).” Http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/D5CC24A7-DC13-4318-B457-5C9014916D7A/0/ENGCONV.pdf, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

²⁰ ECHR (supra, note 1).Google Scholar

²¹ Decision of 22 December 2009 – 2 BvR 2365/09: http://www.bundesverfassungsgericrit.de/entscrieidungen/rk200912222bvr236509.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

²² Bundesverfassungsgericht, decision of 14 October 2004 – 2 BvR 1481/04 = BVerfGE 111, 307: http://www.servat.unibe.ch/dfr/bv111307.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

²³ For further information see, Grabenwarter, Wirkungen eines Urteils des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte – am Beispiel des Falls M. gegen Deutschland, Juristen Zeitung 857 (2010).Google Scholar

²⁴ Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt, decision of 24 June 2010 – 3 Ws 485/10: http://openjur.de/u/52680.html, last accessed 22 September 2010; OLG Karlsruhe, decision of 15 July 2010 – 2 Ws 458/09: http://lrbw.juris.de/cgi-bin/laenderrechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bw&nr=13198, last accessed 22 September 2010; OLG Hamm, decision of 6 July 2010 – 4 Ws 157/10: http://openjur.de/u/52682.html, last accessed 22 September 2010, and decision of 22 July 2010 – 4 decision of Ws 180/10, III—4 Ws 180/10: http://www.strafrecht-online.de/inhalte/strafrechtliche-entscheidungen/aktuelle-urteile/olg-hamm-beschl-v-22072010-4-ws-18010/, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

²⁵ Bundesgerichtshof, decision of 12 May 2010 – 4 StR 577/09: http://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/4/09/4-577-09.php, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

²⁶ Oberlandesgericht Celle, decision of 25 May 2010 – 2 Ws 169/10: http://openjur.de/u/52683.html, last accessed 22 September 2010; OLG Stuttgart, decision of 1 June 2010 – 1 Ws 57/10: http://openjur.de/u/52862.html, last accessed 22 September 2010; OLG Koblenz, decision of 7 June 2010 – 1 Ws 108/10: http://www3.justiz.rlp.de/rechtspr/DisplayUrteil.asp?rowguid=%7b3AEF7EEB-456D-44C4-B1CE-932C65272C49%7d, last accessed 22 September 2010; OLG Nürnberg, decision of 24 June 2010 – 1 Ws 315/10: http://openjur.de/u/52275.html, last accessed 22 September 2010, and 7 July 2010 – 1 Ws 342/10: http://openjur.de/u/54707.html, last accessed 22 September 2010; OLG Köln, decision of 14 July 2010 – 2 WS 428/10: http://www.strafrecht-online.de/inhalte/strafrechtliche-entscheidungen/aktuelle-urteile/olg-koeln-beschl-v-14072010-2-ws-42810/, last accessed 22 September 2010. See, also Bundesverfassungsgericht (supra, note 16).Google Scholar

²⁷ Bundesgerichtshof, judgement of 9 March 2010 – 1 StR 554/09: http://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/1/09/1-554-09.php, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

²⁸ § 121 Abs. 1 Nr. 2, Abs. 2 Nr. 3 of the Judicature Act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz) as amended on 24 July 2010 (BGBI. IS. 976).Google Scholar

²⁹ See, Oberlandesgericht Hamm, decision of 22 July 2010 – 4 Ws 180/10, III-4 Ws 180/10: http://openjur,de/u/54155.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

³⁰ Oberlandesgericht Nürnberg, decision of 4 August 2010 – 1 Ws 404/10: http://openjur.de/u/55218.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

³¹ http://www.BILD.de of 9 August 2010: http://www.bild.de/BILD/politik/2010/08/09/internet-pranger-fuer-sex-verbrecher/unions-politiker-machen-vorstoss.html, last accessed 22 September 2010; Frankfurter Allgemeine FAZ.NET of 9 August 2010: http://www.faz.net/s/Rub594835B672714A1DB1A121534F010EE1/Doc~EF4E0CC2D126C4D77A3AA0D991D6B83FA~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

³² Frankfurter Allgemeine FAZ.NET of 15 August 2010: http://www.faz.net/s/Rub594835B672714A1DB1A121534F010EE1/Doc~E5F3147CFE8664BE2B82D4426749B73AA~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html, last accessed 22 September 2010; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of 7 August 2010, 1–2.; Sueddeutsche.de of 30 July 2010: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/sicherungsverwahrung-unionslaender-rebellieren-gegen-leutheusser-schnarrenberger-1.982129, last accessed 22 September 2010; see, also German Federal Government press conference of 4 August 2010: http://www.bundesregierung.de/nn774/Content/DE/Mitschrift/Pressekonferenzen/2010/08/2010-08-04-regpk.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

³³ Süddeutsche Zeitung of 9 August 2010, at 2; Frankfurter Allgemeine FAZ.NET of 6 August 2010: http://www.faz.net/s/Rub5785324EF29440359B02AF69CB1BB8CC/Doc~EAF4E94F726E949309534124DDF286C36~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

³⁴ Sueddeutsche.de of 29 August 2010: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/reform-der-sicherungsverwahrung-stein-der-weisen-hohle-nuss-1.993591, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

³⁵ According to the Germany law, detention is also possible if a mentally ill person poses danger only to herself. However, this is of no relevance in the present context.Google Scholar

³⁶ World Heath Organization, International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Health Related Problems, 10th Revision, Second Edition, 2005: http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

³⁷ American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, Washington, D.C., American Psychiatric Association, 2000.Google Scholar

³⁸ Habermeyer et al., Kriminologische und diagnostische Merkmale von Häftlingen mit angeordneter Sicherungsverwahrung, Monatsschrift für Kriminologie 317 (2007), at 324; Kinzig, Die Gutachtenpraxis bei der Anordnung von Sicherungsverwahrung, Recht Psychiatrie 9 (1997); see also Puhlmann/Habermeyer, Die Sachverständigenexpertise im Spannungsfeld zwischen Justiz und Psychiatrie am Beispiel des Hangbegriffs des § 66 StGB (Sicherungsverwahrung), Forensische Psychiatrie, Psychologie, Kriminologie 46 (2010).Google Scholar

³⁹ See, for instance, Bundesgerichtshof, decision of 23 October 2007 – 4 StR 358/07: http://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/4/07/4-358-07.php, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Habermeyer et al. (supra, note 38).Google Scholar

⁴¹ See, Habermeyer et al. (supra, note 38); Brewer-Smyth et al., Physical and sexual abuse, salivary Cortisol, and neurologic correlates of violent criminal behavior of female prison inmates, 55 Biological Psychiatry 21 (2004). Among the factors that can be seen to negatively impact a person's ability to adequate social behaviour, is nutrition, see Liu et. al, Malnutrition at Age 3 Years and Externalizing Behavior Problems at Ages 8, 11, and 17 Years, Am J Psychiatry 161 (2004).Google Scholar

⁴² See, Bundesgerichtshof (supra, note 39).Google Scholar

⁴³ Caspi et al., Role of Genotype in the Cycle of Violence in Maltreated Children, 297 Science 851 (2002). For further information with respect to juridical aspects see, Merkel/Roth, Langzeitverwahrung von Gewalttätern, Humboldt Forum Recht, forthcoming, October 2010: http://www.humboldt-forum-recht.de, last accessed 22 September 2010; Merkel/Roth, Bestrafung oder Therapie? – Möglichkeiten und Grenzen staatlicher Sanktion unter Berücksichtigung der Hirnforschung, in: Hirnforschung – Chancen und Risiken für das Recht, 21 (Rechtswissenschaftliche Fakultät der Universität Zürich ed., 2008).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ BGH, decision of 14 January 2009 – 2 StR 565/08 = NStZ-RR 2009.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Badische Zeitung of 21 January 2010.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Burns/Swedlow, Right orbitofrontal tumor with pedophilia symptom and constructional apraxia sign, 60 Arch Neurol 437 (2003); see also Walter et. al, Pedophilia is Linked to Reduced Activation in Hypothalamus and Lateral Prefrontal Cortex During Visual Erotic Stimulation, 62 Biological Psychiatry 698 (2007).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ An exception, however, needs to be made to cases of outstanding brutal aggressiveness or killing, like the case of Jürgen Bartsch, a young man who, during the years 1962–1966, killed four boys aged 8 to 12 in a beastly manner, trying to cut them apart while they were still alive and seeking sexual satisfaction while doing so. Here, the FCJ directed the Regional Court to deal with the question of guilt, see BGHSt 23, 176, 184.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Anderson et al., Impairment of social and moral behavior related to early damage in human prefrontal cortex, Nature Neuroscience 1032 (1999).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Habermeyer et al., (supra, note 38), at 327.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ E.g. in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Berlin und Hessen, see, Landtags-Drucksache Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 4/1282 of 18 August 2004, at 5.Google Scholar

⁵¹ See, German Federal Parliament (Deutscher Bundestag), press release of 26 June 2010: http://www.bundestag.de/presse/hib/201006/2010218/04,html; also see, Sueddeutsche.de of 29 August 2010: last accessed 22 September 2010 (supra note 34).Google Scholar

⁵² See, Ministry of Justice (supra, no. 12).Google Scholar

⁵³ See, Guzzardi v. Italy, judgement of 6 November 1980, App. no. 7367/76, p. 23, para. 100.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See, X v. the United Kingdom, judgement of 5 November 1981. Series A no. 46, p. 17, para. 39.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Van Droogenbroeck, judgement of 24 June 1982. Series A no. 50, p. 16, para. 39.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ See, with different arguments, also Laue, Die Sicherungsverwahrung auf dem europäischen Prüfstand, Juristische Rundschau 203 (2010); Müller, Die Sicherungsverwahrung, das Grundgesetz und die Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, Strafverteidiger 211 (2010).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ See, Ministry of Justice (supra, note 12).Google Scholar

⁵⁸ See, with different arguments, also Rzepka, Sicherheits- statt Rechtsstaat – Überblick und Anmerkungen zu bundles- und landesrechtlichen Konzepten einer nachträglichen Sicherungsverwahrung – Teil 2, Recht & Psychiatrie 208 (2003). But see, Pieroth, Gesetzgebungskompetenz- und Grundrechtsfragen der nachträglichen Sicherungsverwahrung, Juristen Zeitung 927 (2002); Kinzig, Das Gesetz zur Einführung der vorbehaltenen Sicherungsverwahrung, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 3207 (2002); Renzikowski, Die nachträgliche Sicherungsverwahrung und die EMRK, Juristische Rundschau 273 (2004).Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Same applies for prisons as well, since the penalty lies in the reduction of liberty of action only.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ After the death of Skander Vogt, a 30 year old prisoner, chained and isolated 23 hours a day in the penal institution Bochuz VD, Switzerland has established a commission to observe the conditions of mentally ill prisoners in jail: http://bazonline.ch/schweiz/standard/Neues-Strafrecht-erfuellt-Erwartungen-nicht/story/11713381, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

⁶¹ The former chancellor of Germany, Gerhard Schroeder, quoted with respect to child abusers: “Wegschließen” – “und zwar für immer” (Shut away – and that for all times), see, Focus Magazin of 18 February 2002: http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/justiz-wegschliessen-fuer-immeraid207649.html, last accessed 22 September 2010.Google Scholar

⁶² E.g. the US with the Washington's Sexually Violent Predator laws from 1990 and 1991, and Great Britain with the imprisonment for public protection under Section 225 and 226 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.Google Scholar