Definition and Explanation of Terms: Targeted Lethal Shot
In German law, the targeted lethal shot refers to the deliberate discharge of a firearm by an official, aimed at causing the death of a person, in order to avert an imminent and significant danger to the physical integrity, life, or liberty of individuals. It is almost exclusively discussed in connection with police or military operations and is of particular legal relevance in the context of the so-called final rescue shot.
Legal Framework and Statutory Basis
Police Law and Averting Danger
In the federal system of the Federal Republic of Germany, the conditions and limits for the police use of firearms are regulated in the police laws of the federal states as well as in the Federal Police Act. Legally, the targeted lethal shot can only represent the ultimate means of state coercion (principle of ultima ratio).
According to the relevant state police regulations, the use of firearms against persons is generally only permissible if other means of averting danger fail or are clearly unsuitable (§ 63 PolG NRW, § 60 PolG BW, § 54 BPolG). A targeted shot with the intention to kill is thus limited to situations in which no other measures can avert a present, significant danger.
From an administrative law perspective, proportionality must always be maintained. Therefore, a targeted lethal shot may only be discharged if the by far milder means of averting danger is not possible and there is a danger to particularly high-ranking legal interests — regularly the life, health, or freedom of uninvolved persons.
Criminal Law Assessment
Prerequisites for Justification
A targeted lethal shot generally fulfills the criminal offense of a homicide under § 212 StGB (manslaughter) or possibly § 211 StGB (murder). However, anyone acting within the framework of a justification ground is not liable to punishment. The following can be considered:
- Self-defense (§ 32 StGB): If the shot is fired directly to ward off an attack on another’s life, health, or liberty, self-defense may be present if no less severe means remain.
- Defense of Others (§ 32 StGB): The prerequisites are the same as for self-defense, but the protection is on behalf of a third party.
- Action within the Scope of Justifying Necessity (§ 34 StGB): If there are no circumstances of self-defense, a justifying necessity may be considered if the lethal shot is needed to avert a present danger to high-ranking legal interests of others and the death of the assailant is the relatively mildest suitable means (e.g., in cases of rampage, hostage situations).
Limits of Justification
Especially within the framework of modern police law, the boundary to impermissible, particularly disproportionate use of firearms is drawn very narrowly. This becomes problematic, above all, when there is a danger of collective guilt (e.g., targeted lethal shot at a hostage taker with the risk of a missed shot).
German constitutional law explicitly prohibits the targeted killing of innocent people (Federal Constitutional Court, judgment on the Aviation Security Act, 2006: Art. 1 para. 1 GG – Human Dignity). Thus, a targeted lethal shot is not permissible to avert, for example, an (allegedly) hijacked aircraft with non-offenders on board.
Practice: Final Rescue Shots
Definition and Requirements
The final rescue shot describes the targeted shot with lethal intent at a person who, with high probability, is about to commit the most serious crimes such as a hostage situation or even a less severe attack on the life of others, and when other means of defense (communication, negotiation, physical force, non-lethal weapon use) are deemed unpromising.
Formal Requirements
Before the use — as far as circumstances permit — all available, less severe means must be exhausted. The targeted lethal shot is only permissible upon explicit instruction from an operational leader and, where time allows, must be previously threatened to the person affected. The measure must be documented in detail and regularly leads to a prosecutorial review.
Civil Service Law and Disciplinary Law
A targeted lethal shot can have civil service law consequences if it is carried out outside the legal requirements. The official bears full responsibility for justifying the use of the firearm. If a violation of relevant legal norms is established, disciplinary measures may follow, up to removal from service.
International Law and Human Rights
From a human rights perspective, the targeted lethal shot by the state must be measured against the principle of the inviolability of life (Art. 2 ECHR, Art. 6 UN Covenant II). International bodies emphasize the obligation of states to protect life, also from excessive state force. Disregard of these standards can lead to state responsibility under international law.
Legal Assessment and Current Discussions
The targeted killing by the state remains a highly controversial issue from a legal, social, and ethical perspective. The boundary between necessary danger prevention and unlawful state vigilante justice is constantly being further developed within German legal scholarship, case law, and politics. The central focus is always on the principle of prohibition of excess and the obligation to preserve the life of human perpetrators as much as possible, even in extreme situations.
Conclusion
The targeted lethal shot represents an extremely restrictively permitted means of police or military use of force. Its legal limits are defined by constitutional law, criminal law, police law, and international agreements. The prerequisites are an acute, significant danger to the life or liberty of uninvolved persons, the absence of milder alternatives, and strict observance of proportionality. The measure is always subject to comprehensive subsequent review.
Frequently Asked Questions
When is the targeted lethal shot legally permissible?
The use of a targeted lethal shot by state authorities — especially by police officers — is strictly regulated under German law and is generally only permitted in absolute exceptional cases. Decisive is § 63 para. 1 no. 3 of the Federal Police Act as well as the respective state police laws, which allow the use of firearms as an ultimate means if there is an imminent significant danger to the life and limb of others or legal interests of comparable rank. The targeted lethal shot is therefore the ultima ratio if less severe means, especially a warning or non-lethal use of force, are clearly unsuccessful or have already been exhausted. Strict adherence to the principle of proportionality is mandatory; police officers must examine in every situation whether the lethal shot is absolutely necessary to avert an acute danger, for example, in terrorist attacks, hostage situations, or rampage incidents. In addition, every use of a targeted lethal shot is subject to extensive subsequent control through prosecutorial investigations and judicial review.
What criminal consequences result from an unlawful targeted lethal shot?
If a targeted lethal shot is used outside the narrow statutory requirements, this can have serious criminal consequences for the police officer concerned. In particular, offenses such as manslaughter (§ 212 StGB) or even murder (§ 211 StGB) may be considered, depending on the specific circumstances, including possible base motives or treacherousness. Negligent homicide (§ 222 StGB) may also become relevant if the lethal shot was discharged without the necessary care. However, criminal liability does not arise in cases of justifying necessity (§ 34 StGB) or within the framework of self-defense (§ 32 StGB), provided that the legally established conditions are clearly fulfilled. In each case, a detailed individual assessment is carried out, during which both the official’s subjective perception and the objective danger situation at the time of the shooting are examined.
What is the role of the Basic Law in relation to the targeted lethal shot?
The Basic Law, especially Article 2 Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 GG (right to life and physical integrity), imposes strict limits on the targeted lethal shot. The state must adhere to the principle of proportionality; interventions in the right to life are only justified in strictly regulated exceptional cases, based on the principle of human dignity (Article 1 GG). In particular, the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG, judgment of 15 February 2006 – 1 BvR 357/05) clarified that the protection of life is subject to absolute limits, especially when it comes to the targeted killing of innocent persons to avert risk. Every measure that intentionally affects life must be based on a clear legal provision, be explicitly permitted, and meet the requirements for the protection of human dignity and proportionality.
Must the targeted lethal shot always be threatened in advance?
As a rule, a targeted lethal shot, like any use of direct force, must — where possible — be emphatically threatened in advance (§ 61 para. 1 Federal Police Act, comparable provisions in the state police laws). However, the threat can be omitted if there is a danger to the life or physical integrity of others or if the purpose of the measure would otherwise be thwarted. The necessary warning is intended to give the affected person the opportunity to reconsider their behavior and to avert the use of deadly force. Failure to fulfill this warning obligation can impair the lawfulness of the use and lead to significant consequences in a subsequent legal evaluation.
To what extent is the targeted lethal shot compatible with European law?
European law, in particular the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), also has a significant influence on the permissibility of the targeted lethal shot. According to Article 2 ECHR, the right to life is fundamentally protected; exceptions are permitted only in narrowly defined situations, such as defense against unlawful violence, lawful arrest, or prevention of escape. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) also requires that the targeted lethal shot be the absolute last resort (‘absolutely necessary’) to achieve the intended purpose. National legal provisions must be interpreted and applied in this light, so that even when police force is used deadly violence, the requirements of proportionality, legality, and inevitability must always be reviewed.
Are targeted lethal shots reviewed afterwards?
Every targeted lethal shot by police officers is subject to mandatory, comprehensive investigation afterwards. In the course of prosecutorial investigations, it is determined whether the legal requirements were met or whether there was criminal misconduct. In particular, the threat situation, the proportionality of the intervention, the officer’s actions, and possible alternatives are to be critically examined. Independent investigative bodies are often involved, and disciplinary proceedings are also possible. Transparency and oversight are intended to ensure that a targeted lethal shot is only applied in legally permitted cases and that abuse or disproportionate conduct is sanctioned.
Does the law differentiate between a targeted lethal shot and a warning shot?
German police and criminal law clearly differentiate between the targeted lethal shot and the warning shot. While the warning shot is fired into the air or the ground to deter the perpetrator from further acts or prevent escape, the targeted lethal shot is deliberately aimed at a person with the goal of ending an immediate danger to life or comparable legal interests. The legal requirements for the targeted lethal shot are therefore significantly stricter, with case law regularly emphasizing that the targeted lethal shot is only legal if other means of coercion fail and any delay would further increase the danger.
