Why publish a warrant for arrest is a crime TIME ONLINE

Since Tuesday night, the arrest warrant for the 22-year-old Iraqi had spread. The document was blackened in places, but the name and address of the suspect and the details of the offense had to be read. Also names of witnesses and the judge were mentioned.

The document was the first of the right-wing populist group Pro Chemnitz, an AfD district association and the co-founder of Pegida Lutz Bachmann more widespread. It was unclear until Thursday evening, which the document had originally brought to the public.

"I have published the arrest warrant." That was the head of imageNewspaper on Thursday evening. Among them was a public confession of Dresden courthouse Daniel Z. to read. His goal was therefore that "the truth comes to the public". There has been a lot of speculation in the media about crime and the backgrounds, police and judicial power had given little information, Z. said the newspaper. Because he wanted to know, "what really happened, photographed the warrant, which was still in the entry area after posting, photographed." 24 hours later he sent the photo to colleagues from the judiciary, friends of the late Chemnitz Daniel H. and the right-wing group Pro Chemnitz.

On the Facebook page of his lawyer, Z. is also quoted as saying he knew he was the arrest warrant "Violating official duties" and "I will most likely lose my job". But he was not clear that he was "punishable, if possible."

In the article of imageKrant, the 39-year-old legal assistant, can be seen alongside the Dresden lawyer Frank Hannig. This led, after research by Correctiv in March 2015, to the founding meeting of Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the Evening – in the presence of Lutz Bachmann, who is still one of the leading representatives of the Islamophobic and xenophobic society. Bachmann was one of the first to distribute Chemnitz's arrest warrant earlier this week via social networks.

Hannig did not join the Pegida movement. In public he cultivates his image as a combative lawyer who stands up for his clients. According to the Saxon newspaper he represented already sizes from the red-light district of Dresden and hooligans from the forbidden group Elbflorenz. On his Facebook page, which is overwritten with the slogan "We solve problems", but he also clarifies matters such as family law.

First of all, this serves to protect the personal rights of victims and witnesses. As long as there are investigations in a procedure, the presumption of innocence applies. The secret must also guarantee the impartiality of the witnesses.

An arrest warrant is issued to all parties involved in the proceedings, such as the defense lawyers, the prison, the police service responsible for the surrender to the prison, and the interpreters in the Chemnitz case. The Attorney General Dresden, who was in charge of the investigation, ruled out a few days ago that a policeman could easily approach the electronic data system of the Saxon legal system.

In general, however, everyone or a policeman, a politician or a private person applies: whoever has published or spread arrest warrants makes himself punishable. Under Article 353d (3) of the Penal Code (StGB), imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine shall be imposed on the indictment or other official documents in connection with criminal proceedings, fines or disciplinary proceedings, in whole or in substantial parts before they have been discussed in an open procedure or closed. " An arrest warrant can be an "official document".

The Dresden Public Prosecutor also investigates breaches of official secrets under Article 353b of the Criminal Code, as civil servants are obliged to keep a special secret. The publication of an arrest warrant in such a case can be punished with a fine or imprisonment of up to five years. There are a few exceptions to this rule: if the publication applies to the search for witnesses, a search or the official delivery of documents.

The German judges association finds it irresponsible that "sabotages the work of the judiciary and ignores the rule of law" according to political sentiment. Federal manager Sven Rebehn said that the publication could damage trust in the rule of law and its institutions. A rule-of-law procedure would be violated "because it may affect witnesses who may no longer be impartial in court proceedings". Further investigations could be made more difficult if the facts become known "at an early stage of the procedure". Moreover, it puts the accused "publicly under the spell", according to Rebehn.

The German Bar Association (DAV) warned that, for example, family members could be affected if such documents were published. The penetration of the contents of the file also affected the quality of truth finding in general & # 39; said lawyer Stefan Conen, member of the Criminal Law Committee of DAV. This also applies to a later lawsuit and the result thereof, "because such errors can hardly be restored afterwards." Conen also warned that the pillory effect – in addition to the massive interference in the privacy rights of suspects – could also be "tempted to test more heavily than otherwise would be the case."