Definition and Significance of Accountability
Die Accountability in German law refers to the ability of a natural person to personally answer for their own actions or omissions and to be legally responsible for the resulting consequences. It is a central concept of the legal system and affects both criminal law and civil law. Accountability serves as a prerequisite for attributing legal responsibility and liability.
Accountability in Criminal Law
General Significance
In criminal law, accountability is a necessary prerequisite for holding a person criminally responsible. It is particularly relevant in connection with criminal capacity according to Sections 19 et seq. of the German Criminal Code (StGB). Only those who, at the time of the offense, have the capacity for understanding and self-control as required by law, can be held criminally responsible for their conduct.
Criminal Capacity and Its Assessment
The rules on accountability in criminal law are primarily found in the following provisions:
- Section 19 StGB: Criminal incapacity of children
Children under 14 years of age are deemed incapable of guilt by law. They bear no criminal responsibility.
- Section 20 StGB: Criminal incapacity due to mental disorders
Persons who, due to pathological mental disorders, profound disturbances of consciousness, feeble-mindedness, or other severe mental abnormalities, are unable to comprehend the wrongfulness of their act or to act in accordance with such understanding, are deemed incapable of guilt.
- Section 21 StGB: Diminished criminal capacity
If the ability to understand or control one’s actions is significantly diminished, but not wholly absent, this may be taken into account to mitigate the penalty.
Distinction: Criminal incapacity and diminished criminal capacity
This distinction is crucial for the consequences under criminal law. Complete criminal incapacity removes criminal liability, while diminished criminal capacity allows for sentencing mitigation (Section 49 (1) StGB).
Assessment of Accountability in Criminal Proceedings
The accountability of a defendant is often assessed by expert opinion. What matters is always the state at the time of the act. Factors such as acute mental illness, intellectual disability, intoxication from alcohol or drugs, and disturbances of consciousness play a significant role in the assessment.
Special Case: Criminal incapacity due to alcohol and drugs
If an act is committed while a person is criminally incapable due to alcohol or other intoxicating substances (Section 20 StGB), criminal liability for an intoxication offense under Section 323a StGB may nevertheless arise under certain circumstances.
Accountability in Civil Law
Liability capacity (Sections 827 et seq. BGB)
In civil law, accountability is defined as liability capacity It refers to the ability to be civilly liable for wrongful acts pursuant to Section 823 BGB.
- Section 828 (1) BGB: Children under 7 years of age lack liability capacity and are not liable for damages.
- Section 828 (2) BGB: Minors between 7 and 18 years are only conditionally liable; the decisive factor is their ability to recognize the wrongfulness of their action.
- Section 827 BGB: Anyone in a state of unconsciousness or suffering from a pathological disorder of mental activity is not liable for torts.
Exclusion of Liability and Exceptions
In certain cases, the law excludes accountability even for adults—for example, due to severe psychiatric illnesses. The burden of proving lack of accountability lies with the injuring party.
Accountability in Other Areas of Law
Administrative Law
In administrative law, accountability is relevant particularly for regulatory offenses. Responsibility requires the ability to recognize unlawfulness and to control one’s conduct accordingly.
Family Law and Guardianship Law
In family and guardianship law, accountability is significant when it comes to statutory representation, for example, by a guardian or custodian for persons who cannot manage their own affairs. Lack of accountability can lead to the appointment of a legal representative.
Terminological Distinctions
Criminal capacity and capacity to contract
Although related concepts, accountability must be distinguished from capacity to contract (within the meaning of Sections 104 et seq. BGB) and from criminal maturity While capacity to contract refers to the ability to enter into legally effective transactions, accountability specifically concerns whether legal responsibility can be ascribed for acts or omissions.
Practical Importance
Determining accountability is of critical importance for the application of law in various fields. It affects not only criminal prosecution and civil liability, but also a person’s legal status in health law, family law, and social law.
Literature and Further Reading
- German Criminal Code (StGB), especially Sections 19 et seq.
- German Civil Code (BGB), especially Sections 827 et seq.
- Legal texts at gesetze-im-internet.de
Accountability is a central concept for ensuring fair rights and obligations in relation to the actions of natural persons and has far-reaching consequences across a wide range of legal fields. It ensures that only those who, due to their mental capabilities, could understand and control their actions are held responsible for them.
Frequently Asked Questions
When is the accountability of an offender legally reviewed?
The accountability of an offender is reviewed whenever there are indications that, at the time of the offense, the accused was unable to comprehend the wrongfulness of their act or to act in accordance with this understanding. In criminal proceedings, this may be triggered by behavioral anomalies, medical certificates, witness statements, or previous psychiatric diagnoses. The examination is often initiated by police, prosecutors, or the court, and, in case of doubt, is substantiated by obtaining a specialist psychiatric report. It must be clarified whether specific medical or psychological disorders—such as a severe psychosis, intellectual disability, or a profound disturbance of consciousness—were present. The benchmark is always the specific time of the offense. The final decision as to whether limited or nullified accountability existed is made by the court at its own discretion on the basis of all the evidence.
What are the legal consequences of nullified accountability?
If a court has legally established that accountability was nullified (Section 20 StGB), the offender is not responsible for the crime committed and is thus not subject to punishment. This means that the offender cannot receive criminal sanctions such as imprisonment or a fine. However, proceedings may continue with a view to preventive measures (such as placement in a psychiatric institution under Section 63 StGB) if the offender poses significant risks to the public. It should be noted that, despite the absence of criminal liability, administrative or civil measures—such as actions to avert danger or for liability for damages—may still be relevant.
How does limited differ from nullified accountability?
The legal distinction between limited and nullified accountability is essential: Nullified accountability (Section 20 StGB) is present if the ability to understand or control behavior was completely absent—in such cases, criminal liability is excluded. Where accountability was only significantly diminished (Section 21 StGB), some aspects of the ability to understand or control remained but were severely impaired. This does not lead to exoneration, but allows for discretionary mitigation of punishment: The court may, but is not required to, reduce the sentence after taking into account the limited criminal capacity.
Who is responsible for determining accountability?
The relevant court is fundamentally responsible for the legal determination of accountability. In criminal proceedings, the court can appoint a psychiatric expert to prepare a report on the mental, emotional, and volitional state of the accused at the time of the act. Such reports serve as important decision-making tools; nevertheless, the assessment and final determination of nullified or limited accountability are original legal tasks of the court, which is not bound by the report’s findings.
At what stages of proceedings can accountability be reviewed?
Accountability can be reviewed as early as the investigation stage, but at the latest during the main trial. Even during police investigations or the intermediate proceedings, if there are indications of mental illness or peculiarities of the suspect, it is possible to involve psychological expertise. The court can also request a report or initiate new evidence gathering during the main hearing if relevant doubts arise during the proceedings. Review may also take place in subsequent judicial proceedings, for example, in the context of retrials.
What role does accountability play in juvenile criminal law?
In juvenile criminal law (Section 3 JGG), accountability is also of central significance. For juveniles under fourteen years of age, there is an irrebuttable presumption that they lack criminal capacity (“absolute incapacity”). In the case of those between fourteen and eighteen, the ability to comprehend the wrongfulness of the act and to act accordingly is assessed individually. Here, the so-called “relative incapacity” is examined. The assessment is based on the developmental stage and conducted—just as in adult criminal law—after expert medical evaluation and judicial assessment.
What are typical examples of impairments to legal accountability?
Typical legal impairments to accountability include, among others, acute psychosis, delusional disorders, severe intellectual disabilities, pathological psychiatric disturbances, epileptic seizures, or profound disturbances of consciousness (e.g., due to intoxication, provided the defendant is not at fault for the intoxication). Pronounced personality disorders may also be relevant if they significantly impair the ability to understand or control. Substance use is generally not a ground for excuse unless resulting from a defect for which the offender is not responsible.
Can lack of accountability also have civil or administrative consequences?
In addition to criminal consequences, lack of or limited accountability can also have civil law effects, such as on liability capacity under Sections 827 et seq. BGB. A person incapable of guilt generally cannot be held liable for damage caused, unless an exceptional legal provision applies (e.g., incapacity to contract). In administrative law, lack of accountability may lead to official measures, such as appointment of a guardian, institutionalization, or incapacitation. However, all such measures require individual legal and factual review.
