Abstract
While the last chapter described how organizational factors shaped the prosecution of major crimes in general terms, in this chapter I explore how nuances in the criminal law, combined with organizational factors, impact decision-making. In focusing on the prosecution of serious economic crimes, I demonstrate how organizational priorities and resource allocations impact prosecution rates. By creating groups of prosecutors with specialized expertise, some states have made a strategic choice to prioritize the prosecution of serious economic crime and corruption. In many of those specialized departments, prosecutors create work routines which reflect a shared approach to practice that, in some cases, is shared by the investigative team itself. Due to the complexity of many economic crimes, prosecutors must find ways to successfully work in joint investigation teams across agency lines. To succeed in this environment, during the investigation process, many prosecutors have had to abandon work practices of the past which reflected prosecutors’ strict hierarchical control of the investigation’s progress. In the most effective units, prosecutors no longer inscribe a written order in a file and then wait a day for a file to be delivered to law enforcement. Instead these prosecutors must meet with investigators face-to-face, use email, or pick up the phone to steer and coordinate the course of investigation on a daily basis. Despite that coordination, in some cases, these investigations may last several years.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8HL], 25 May 2006.
- 2.
The Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions (21 November 1997).
- 3.
Gesetz zur Bekämpfung der Korruption [KorrBekG] [Anti-Corruption Act], STRAFGESETZBUCH [STGB] [PENAL CODE], August 19, 1997, BUNDESGESETZBLATT [BGBL.] I §§ 331–35 (Ger.).
- 4.
§332(1) StGB.
- 5.
§ 332(1)–(2)StGB.
- 6.
§ 335(1)(a).
- 7.
§108e StGB.
- 8.
§299 StGB.
- 9.
Land Level Ministry of Justice Official [9RR], 30 June 2006.
- 10.
BGH 5 StR 268/05 (2 Dezember 2005) (LG Köln).
- 11.
Id. at 20. The original German language in the decision reads: In diesem Zusammenhang sieht der Senat Anlass zu folgender Anmerkung. Nach der Erfahrung des Senats kommt es bei einer Vielzahl von großen Wirtschaftsstrafverfahren dazu, dass eine dem Unrechtsgehalt schwerwiegender Korruptions- und Steuerhinterziehungsdelikte adäqute Bestrafung allein deswegen nicht erfolgen kann, weil für diegebotenen Aufklärung derart komplexer Sachverhalte keine ausreichenden justiziellen Resourcen zur Verfügung stehen.
- 12.
Art. 6 (1) European Convention on Human Rights.
- 13.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [10BJ], 26 June 2006.
- 14.
Constitution of Courts Act, §74c .par. 1 n 5 and 6.
- 15.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [1ZU], 15 March 2006.
- 16.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8HL], 25 May 2006.
- 17.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006.
- 18.
Sect. 160 (1) StPO states: “As soon as the public prosecution office obtains knowledge of a suspected criminal offense either through a criminal information or by other means, it shall investigate the facts to decide whether public charges are to be preferred.”
- 19.
Police Officer [26AE], 27 January 2006.
- 20.
Police Officer [26AE], 27 January 2006.
- 21.
Tax Administration Official [26AD], 25 January 2006.
- 22.
Tax Administration Official [26AD], 25 January 2006.
- 23.
Tax Administration Official [26AD], 25 January 2006.
- 24.
§100(c) (3) StPO. The new provision may be found at §100(a)(2)(1)(t) StPO.
- 25.
Law on the Revision of Telecommunications Monitoring and other Covert Investigation Measures and implementing Directive 2006/24/EC113 of 21 December 2007.
- 26.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [1ZU], 25 May 2006.
- 27.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006.
- 28.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [6FE], 21 July 2006.
- 29.
Tax Administration Official [26AD], 25 January 2006.
- 30.
Case Meeting Observation, 26 January 2006.
- 31.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006.
- 32.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [1ZU], 25 May 2006.
- 33.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8AQ], 22 May 2006; Senior Prosecutor Interview [8HL], 24 May 2006.
- 34.
Sect. 112 StGB. According to Sect. 112 (2):
A ground for arrest shall exist if on the basis of certain facts: 1. it is established that the accused is fled or hiding; 2) considering the circumstances of the individual case, there is a risk that the accused will evade the criminal proceedings (risk of flight); or 3. the accused’s conduct gives rise to the strong suspicion that he will a) destroy, alter, remove, suppress, or falsify evidence, b) improperly influence coaccused, witnesses, or experts, or c) cause others to do so, and if, therefore the danger exists that establishment of the truth will be made more difficult (risk of tampering with evidence).
- 35.
Sect. 121 (1) StGB.
- 36.
Sect. 122 (1) 2 StGB.
- 37.
See, e.g., Group Leader Prosecutor Interview [8FN], 26 May 2006; Group Leader Prosecutor Interview [8DE], 26 May 2006.
- 38.
According to Section 266, the offense of “Breach of Trust” trust is defined as:
Whoever abuses the power accorded him by statute, by commission of a public authority or legal transaction to dispose of assets of another or to obligate another, or violates the duty to safeguard the property interests of another incumbent upon him by reason of statute, commission of a public authority, legal transaction or fiduciary relationship, and thereby causes detriment to the person, whose property interest he was responsible for, shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine.
- 39.
Group Leader Prosecutor Interview [8FN], 26 May 2006.
- 40.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8AQ], 26 May 2006.
- 41.
Prosecutor Interview [9CR], 14 June 2006.
- 42.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8HL], 24 May 2006.
- 43.
Sect. 46(I) StGB.
- 44.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8HL], 24 May 2006.
- 45.
Sect. 153a StPO.
- 46.
More than one individual may be charged in a single case.
- 47.
Second Office Prosecutor [16PP], 30 April 2008.
- 48.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [1ZU], 15 March 2006.
- 49.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [1ZU], 15 March 2006.
- 50.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006.
- 51.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [10BJ], 26 June 2006.
- 52.
Prosecutor Interview [13BR], 18 November 2005; Prosecutor Interview [12AE], 28 November 2005; and Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006.
- 53.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006.
- 54.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006.
- 55.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8HL], 2 May 2006.
- 56.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [1ZU], 15 March 2006.
- 57.
Senior Prosecutor Interview [10BJ], 26 June 2006.
References
Books, Articles and Online Publications
Amies, N. (2004a). How corrupt is Germany? Deutsche Welle, 16 March. Available at http://www.dworld.de/dw/article/0,1564,1144554,00.html.
Amies, N. (2004b). How corrupt is Germany. Deutsche Welle (16 Mar 2004). Available at http://www.dw.de/how-corrupt-is-germany/a-1144554.
Associated Press. (2007). German charged in Volkswagen corruption inquiry, International Herald Tribune, 4 January. Available at http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/04/business/vw.php.
BBC NEWS (2001). Kohl charges dropped. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1198301.stm (March 2, 2001).
Bundesministerium des Innern (2011). Private sector/federal administration anti-corruption initiative, 13 August. http://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/Themen/OED_Verwaltung/Korruption/initiativkreis_korruptionspraevention2.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
Cohen, R. (2000). Suicide of a party official is tied to German scandal, New York Times, 21 January. Available at http://www.globalpolicy.org/nations/corrupt/kohl15.htm.
Dempsey, J. (2012). Germany cleans up its politics, 19 March. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/world/europe/20iht-letter20html?_r=0. Accessed 2 Aug 2013.
Deutsche Welle. (2006). Prosecutors agree to drop charges in Mannesmann trial, 24 November. Available at http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2247880,00.html.
Dougherty, C. (2007). Germany takes aim at corporate corruption, International Herald Tribune. Available at http://www.nytime.com/2007/02/114/business/worldbusiness/14iht-scandal.4596099.html.
Germany’s Party Finance Scandal “Ends” With Kohl’s Plea Bargain and Too Many Unanswered Questions. 2001. German Law Journal, 5:2 (15 March). Available at http://www.germanlawjournal.com/article.php?id=60.
Goel, A. & Jo, M. Y. (2012). Recent anti-corruption developments in Germany. In A. Goel (Ed.), International anti-bribery and corruption trends and developments (pp. 2–52). Available at http://www.ropesgray.com/biographies/g/~/media/Files/articles/2012/05/201205321_ABC_Book.ashx. Accessed 1 Aug 2013.
Guyon, J. (2004). The trials of Josef Ackerman, Fortune, 26 January 2004. Available at http://money.cnn.com/magazines/forture/fortune_archive/2004/01/26/358833/index.htm.
Hornung, R. (2010). The Baden-Wurttemberg example. Germany: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Anti-Corruption Network for Eastern Europe and Central Asia
Horsley, W. (2001). Kohl’s legacy: burnished or tarnished? British Broadcasting Company, 2 March. Available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1199032.stm.
Jenkins, P. (2004). Germany on trial. Financial Times, 15 January. Available at http://search.ft.com/iab?queryText=Patrick%20Jenkins%20Germany%20on%20Trial&aje=true&id=040114007034&location=http53A%2F%2Fsearch.ft.com%2FttArticle%3FqueryText%DPatrick+Jenkins+Germany+on+Trial%26aje%3Dtrue%26id53D040114007034&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ft.com%2Fsearch%3FqueryText%3DPatrick+Jenkins+Germany+on+Trial.
Kohl Charges Dropped. (2001). British Broadcasting Company, 2 March. Available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1198301.stm.
Kolla, P. (2004). The Mannesmann trial and the role of the courts. German Law Journal, 5:829–847. Available at: http://www.germanlawjournal.com/index.php?pageID=11&artID=460.
Kreutzer, C. (2002). Interview: Deutschland ist keine Bananenrepublik, FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, 19 March. Available at http://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/interview-deutschland-ist-keine-bananenrepublik-149119.html.
Löhe, M. G. (2006). Ressourcen der Korruptionsbekämpfung in Deutschland. Berlin: Transparency International Deutschland. Available at http://www.transparency.de/fileadmin/pdfs/Themen/Justiz/justizielle_ressourcen_2007_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 5 Aug 2013.
Maier, S. (2006). A close look at the Mannesmann trial. German Law Journal, 7:603–610. Available at http://www.germanlawjournal.com/index.php?pageID=11&artID=735.
Munchau, W. (2004). Market economics is in the dock in Germany, Financial Times (US Edition), 26 January.
OECD Governance (2004). Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Report on Germany (Complete Edition), vol. 2003, p. 27.
OECD Anti-Corruption Network for Eastern Europe and Central Asia. (2010). In Proceedings of the seminar on effective means of investigation and prosecution of corruption (expert seminar), National Anti-Corruption Directorate of Romania, Bucharest, 20–22 October 2010. Available at http://www.oecd.org/corruption/acn/47588859.pdf. Accessed 31 July 2013.
Parkin, B. (2007). German state fires aide as Grime probe nears Merkel Government, Bloomberg.Com, 13 June.
Rubenfeld, S. (2011). German’s anti-bribery efforts get high marks from OECD, Wall Street Journal, 23 March. Available at http://blogs.wsj.com/corruption-currents/2011/03/23/germanys-anti-bribery-efforts-get-high-marks-from-oecd/tab/print.
Staff Writer. (2006). Dogmeat and the truffle pig, The Economist, 7 September. Available at http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7887902. Accessed 5 Aug 2013.
Streng, F. (2007). Sentencing in Germany: Basic questions and new developments. German Law Journal, 8, 153–172.
Teil, R. (2007). Zu wenige Staatsanwälte, zu viel Korruption: Eine_bersicht von Transparency International, TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL DEUTSCHLAND e.V. Available at http://www.transparency.de/Zu-wenige-Staatsanwaelte-zu.440.98.html.
Thomas Sims, G. (2007). Germany rethinks board structure after corruption scandals, International Herald Tribune, 5 April. Available at http://iht.com/articles/2007/04/05/news/board.php.
Von Hawranek, D. (2006). Schmutz und Schund, Der Spiegel [online]. 27 March. Available online at http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-46421534.html. Accessed 5 Aug 2013.
Wiehen, M. H. (2001) Submission of TI Deutschland to GRECO regarding the evaluation of anti-corruption activities in Germany, Transparency International Deutsches Chapter, e.V., 21 September. Available at www.transparency.de/fileadmin/pdfs/30.83.00Submission18.9.01.pdf.
Wyatt, C. (2000). Analysis: German political tremors spread, British Broadcasting Company, 14 January. Available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1199032.stm.
Zawadsky, K. (2006). Bought justice at Mannesmann trial still taught lessons, Editorial Opinion, 29, November. Available at http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/o,2144,2252960,00.html.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Appendices
Legislation
6.1.1 Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO)
§100(a)(2)(1)(t)
§100(c)(3)
§153a
§160(1)
6.1.2 Code of Criminal Law (StGB)
§46(1)
§108e
§112
§112(2)
§121(1)
§122(1)2
§266
§299
§332(1)
§332(1)–(2)
§335(1)(a)
6.1.3 European Convention on Human Rights
Article 6 (1)
6.1.4 Other Laws
BGH 5 StR 268/05 (2 Dezember 2005) (LG Köln).
German Stock Corporation Act. Section 87(1)(i).
Law on the Revision of Telecommunications Monitoring and other Covert Investigation Measures and Implementing Directive 2006/24/EC113 of 21, December 2007.
Gestez zur Bekämpfung der Korruption [KorrBekG] [Anti-Corruption Act], Strafgestezbuch [StGB] [Penal Code], August 19, 1997, Bundesgestezblatt [BGBL], 1 at 2038 §§331-35 (Ger.)
Constitution of Courts Acat, §74c, par. 1 n5 and 6.
Reports/Statistics
Bundesrepublix Deutschalnd, Bundesministerium Des Innern [Federal Ministry of the Interior], 2001. Private Sector/Federal Administration Anti-Corruption Initiative, Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Accepting Gifts, Hospitality, or Other Benefits 9. Available at: <http://bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/Themen/OED_Verwaltung/Korruption/initiativkreis_korruptionspraevention2.pdf?_blob=publicatoinFile>.
Bundeskriminaltamt, 2005. Situation Report – Organised Crime in the Federal Republic of Germany. (June) Available at: < www.bka.de/lagebericht/ok/2004kf/lagebild_ok_2004_kurzlage_englisch.pdf>.
Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Federal Republic of German], Bundeskriminalamt [Federal Criminal Office], Korruption: Bundeslagebild 2010 [Corruption: The Federal Picture 2010] (2011) Available at: <http://www.bka.de/nn_193376/DE/Publikationen/JahresberichteUndLagebilder/Korruption/korruption__node.html?__nnn=true>.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Working Group on Bribery in International Business Transactions, Phase 3 Evaluation of Germany position paper – on-site visit on 23 September 2010. Available at: <http://www.transparency.de/Position-Paper.1735.0.html?&no_cache=1&sword_list%5B55D=prosecutors>. [Accessed on 31 July 2013].
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Working Group on Bribery, Phase 3 Report on Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention in Germany (March 2011), Available at: <http://www.oecd.org/germany/Germanyphase3reportEN.pdf>.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2012 Data Enforcement of the Anti-Bribery Convention (June 2013). Available at: <http://www.oecd.org/daf/anti-bribery/WorkingGrouponBribery_2012EnforcementData.pdf>.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2004. Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Report on Germany (Complete Edition, OECD Governance, Volume 2003, Number 27, (Sept.).
Interviews
Case Meeting Observation, 26 January 2006
Group Leader Prosecutor Interview [8FN], 26 May 2006
Group Leader Prosecutor Interview [8DE], 26 may 2006
Land Level Ministry of Justice Official [9RR], 30 June 2006
Police Officer [26AE], 27 January 2006
Prosecutor Interview [9CR], 14 June 2006
Prosecutor Interview [10BJ], 26 June 2006
Prosecutor Interview [13BR], 18 November 2005
Prosecutor Interview [12AE], 28 November 2005
Second Office Prosecutor [16PP], 30 April 2008
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8HL], 24–25 May 2006
Senior Prosecutor Interview [10BJ], 26 June 2006
Senior Prosecutor Interview [1ZU], 15 March 2006/25 May 2006
Senior Prosecutor Interview [5BC], 16 January 2006
Senior Prosecutor Interview [6FE], 21 July 2006
Senior Prosecutor Interview [8AQ], 26 May 2006
Tax Administration Official [26AD], 25 January 2006
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boyne, S.M. (2014). A Closer Look at Discretion: The Prosecution of Serious Economic Crimes. In: The German Prosecution Service. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40928-8_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40928-8_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40927-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40928-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)