Term and Definition: Wrongfully Convicted Person
The term “wrongfully convicted person” refers, in a legal context, to an individual who has been convicted with final legal effect for a criminal offense in court proceedings, despite not having actually committed the act they are accused of. The status of a wrongfully convicted person arises from the discrepancy between the material truth and the formal legal force of a judgment. Despite proven innocence, the court’s decision continues to impose criminal liability until rehabilitation takes place.
Legal Basis of Conviction
Criminal Conviction
In the German legal system, criminal convictions are based on the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) and the Criminal Code (StGB). A verdict is deemed final if it can no longer be challenged by ordinary means such as appeal or revision. Even an objectively incorrect decision becomes legally binding once it is final, meaning it remains binding until it is set aside or amended.
Sources of Error in Judicial Decision-Making Processes
Judicial errors leading to the conviction of innocent individuals can have various causes, including: Absence or errors in evidence gathering False statements or witness testimonies Errors in expert opinions Mistakes in police or prosecutorial investigations Inadequate defense Violation of procedural rights and principles, especially the principle of “in dubio pro reo” (when in doubt, for the accused)
Legal Remedies and Options for Correction
Reopening Proceedings
Under German criminal law, the reopening of proceedings (§§ 359 et seq. StPO) is available as an extraordinary legal remedy. It allows for renewed examination and assessment of a legally binding judgment if new facts or evidence emerge that can prove the convicted person’s innocence.
Requirements for Reopening
Reopening is particularly permissible if new evidence can prove innocence (§ 359 No. 5 StPO), a witness or expert later admits to giving false testimony, another judgment has identified a key piece of evidence as incorrect, the decision was based upon a criminal act, such as judicial perversion of justice (§ 339 StGB).
Procedure for Reopening Proceedings
Applications to reopen are to be submitted to the court that last ruled on the case. If the application is granted, a new main hearing follows, in which the evidence is reassessed in light of the new circumstances.
Compensation for Judicial Error
Wrongfully convicted individuals are entitled to financial compensation for imprisonment suffered under the “Law on Compensation for Criminal Prosecution Measures” (StrEG) (§§ 1 et seq. StrEG). The amount of compensation is legally regulated and also covers property damages as well as non-material damages (pain and suffering).
Requirements and Scope of Compensation
The prerequisite is the full or partial overturning of the judgment in favor of the affected person. Compensation claims are directed against the respective federal state in whose area of responsibility the judicial error occurred. Payment is made regardless of the fault of the acting persons.
European and International Dimension
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Article 3 of Protocol No. 7 to the ECHR guarantees the right to compensation if it is subsequently established that a criminal conviction was incorrect. Germany is internationally obliged by the ECHR to ensure effective legal protection.
Other International Agreements
Other international treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), also guarantee the right to reparation for wrongfully convicted individuals.
Statistical and Societal Significance
Frequency and Dark Figure
The number of actually wrongfully convicted persons is difficult to determine, as only a fraction of cases become known through reopening procedures or media reporting. The actual number is likely higher than the official number of successfully revised judgments.
Consequences for Those Affected
The effects of a wrongful conviction are severe. In addition to loss of liberty, individuals may face social stigmatization, loss of employment, destroyed family relationships, as well as psychological and physical harm. Complete rehabilitation after the overturning of the judgment often takes a long time and is not always fully possible.
Reform Efforts and Preventive Measures
Improvement of Evidence Collection and Legal Protection
The judiciary continuously works to improve investigative and evidentiary standards, for example by expanding forensic methods such as DNA analyses and strengthening defense rights and procedural safeguards.
Promotion of Miscarriage-of-Justice Commissions
Some countries have independent commissions to review suspected miscarriages of justice in order to systematically reduce the number of wrongfully convicted persons. The introduction of such bodies is repeatedly discussed in Germany.
Literature and Further References
For further study of the topic, the following works and legal provisions are recommended: §§ 359 et seq. StPO (Reopening of Proceedings) Law on Compensation for Criminal Prosecution Measures (StrEG) Article 3 of Protocol No. 7 to the ECHR International human rights treaties
* Monographs and specialist literature on miscarriages of justice
Summary
The term “wrongfully convicted person” describes an individual falsely convicted in criminal proceedings. The causes are diverse, ranging from investigative errors to serious legal violations. The German legal system provides effective mechanisms for correction and compensation through reopening proceedings and claims for compensation. The true number of cases remains unknown, and the societal as well as personal impacts are significant. Ongoing optimization of the legal system and victim compensation is therefore a key component of legal protection.
Frequently Asked Questions
What legal options are available to wrongfully convicted persons to challenge a judgment?
Wrongfully convicted persons in Germany have various legal remedies and appeals to challenge a judgment. Initially, there is the option of appeal or revision after the first instance judgment; an appeal usually includes a complete reassessment of the facts, whereas the revision reviews only legal errors of the initial judgment. Once the judgment becomes final, the reopening of proceedings under §§ 359 et seq. StPO is available as an extraordinary remedy. Reopening may especially be applied for when new evidence or credible indications of a miscarriage of justice are available. Additionally, a continuation application or a complaint can be lodged in exceptional cases, for example in the case of procedural violations. After all remedies are exhausted, a constitutional complaint can be brought before the Federal Constitutional Court if fundamental rights have been violated. In extreme cases, such as concerns under international law, an application for reopening may also be considered under Art. 103 para. 3 GG. Finally, the European Court of Human Rights allows complaints if national case law has violated fundamental Convention rights. In addition to these judicial proceedings, a petition for clemency can be submitted to the relevant Ministry of Justice, which is an extrajudicial and discretionary avenue.
How high are the thresholds for a successful reopening of criminal proceedings?
The statutory thresholds for a successful reopening of criminal proceedings in favor of a finally convicted person are very high and are conclusively regulated by § 359 StPO. Grounds for reopening include the existence of new facts or evidence that are demonstrably suitable to influence the judgment in the convicted person’s favor. A confession of the act by a third party (ne ultra petita) can also, in certain cases, justify a motion to reopen. In practice, new types of evidence such as DNA analyses or previously unknown exculpatory witnesses are used. Another obstacle is that the new evidence must be truly capable of fundamentally changing the judgment; purely speculative or insignificant findings are not sufficient. Case law requires a substantive, plausible explanation that, considering the new evidence, a conviction would most likely not have occurred. Furthermore, the reopening procedure is formalized and subject to strict deadlines and requirements, so it is advisable to engage representation by an experienced criminal defense lawyer.
What compensation claims exist for wrongfully convicted persons following the overturning of a judgment?
When a wrongfully convicted person is subsequently exonerated and acquitted with final legal effect, there is a claim to compensation according to the Law on Compensation for Criminal Prosecution Measures (StrEG). This covers both compensation for pretrial detention or prison sentences suffered as well as reimbursement for property losses that arose directly from the criminal prosecution measure. Compensation for detention is set at a flat rate per day (since 2021: 75 euros per day), provided the person concerned is not partly to blame. Additionally, there can be a claim for the reimbursement of specific pecuniary losses, such as lost earnings, legal costs, or other expenses, provided a direct causal link to the unlawful prosecution can be demonstrated. Compensation for non-material damages, for example harm to reputation, is also possible, though case law remains restrictive on this point. Successful exoneration or termination of proceedings under § 2 StrEG is required to assert such claims. For damages not caused directly by prosecution, but indirectly, such as through social exclusion, prospects of compensation are limited.
What role does the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) play for wrongfully convicted persons?
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg serves as an international supervisory body to safeguard human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Wrongfully convicted persons can turn to the ECtHR after exhausting all domestic remedies if they claim that convention-protected rights, such as the right to a fair trial, were violated in the national proceedings. Typical grounds for complaint include violations of the presumption of innocence, inadequate defense opportunities, refusals to reopen proceedings with new evidence, or unfair evidence gathering. If successful, the ECtHR can oblige the Federal Republic to re-hear the case or to pay compensation, but does not in principle bind national courts regarding the substantive criminal judgment itself. Its rulings have significant political and legal impact but do not automatically result in the quashing of criminal judgments, instead usually requiring renewed domestic review.
What are typical legal causes of miscarriages of justice?
From a legal perspective, miscarriages of justice often arise due to improper assessment of evidence, inadmissible or erroneous evidence, incorrect application or interpretation of legal provisions, or procedural errors in criminal proceedings such as judicial bias, inadequate defense, violation of the right to be heard, or procedural breaches during investigations. Particularly, false witness statements, faulty or mistaken expert reports, unlawfully obtained confessions, or disregard of exculpatory evidence are legally relevant causes. Systemic issues such as overloaded courts, time pressure, and outdated or missing technical methods for collecting evidence (for example, earlier judgments without DNA analyses) also contribute to miscarriages of justice. In rare cases, structural biases or prejudicial media coverage can play a role, for instance by influencing public opinion and thereby indirectly the judiciary. The German legal system provides various corrective mechanisms through the legal remedies mentioned, although their effectiveness can vary in individual cases.
What duties do defense counsel have when confronted with evidence indicating possible innocence?
Defense counsel are legally required to defend their client’s interests to the best of their abilities and must fully pursue any leads suggesting possible innocence. This includes thorough examination of the investigation files, independent search for exculpatory evidence, requesting further evidence gathering in court, and providing diligent advice on suitable legal remedies. If new facts or evidence arise during or after the proceedings, attorneys must consider whether a motion to reopen would be promising. The duty to uphold the so-called fair trial principle is part of professional and ethical obligations. Failure to do so can result not only in liability but also professional sanctions by the bar association.
What does the process of reopening criminal proceedings look like in practice?
The reopening procedure starts with a formal application to the court that made the initial judgment or—if no one is available there—before the succeeding court. The application can be submitted by the affected person or their defense counsel, and must state and substantiate the ground for reopening under § 359 StPO with precision. The court first checks in a preliminary stage whether a valid application and at least a plausible reason for reopening exist. If admissible, the main hearing on the permissibility of reopening follows. If this is granted, the case is usually retried (typically by a new panel or division different from the original trial). The new proceedings can result in a full acquittal, a different sentence, or a new conviction. During the entire process, there is a right to legal representation, and the suspension of sentence execution can be requested if there are substantial doubts about the conviction. Due to its complexity and strict formal requirements, the reopening procedure is one of the most demanding mechanisms in German criminal procedure law.
