Experts have an important function in criminal proceedings. They are always used when legal knowledge alone is not sufficient. Courts and public prosecutors’ offices rely on them to reliably clarify medical, technical, or economic issues. The German Code of Criminal Procedure defines the expert in § 125 Z 1 StPO.

The expert collects technically relevant facts and draws comprehensible conclusions from them. Their report is intended to help the court understand complex issues and assess them correctly under the law. In many proceedings, this technical assessment decisively shapes the further course of events.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Experts in the main proceedings

In the main proceedings, only the court appoints experts. Neither the public prosecutor’s office nor other parties to the proceedings can independently appoint an expert. The court alone decides whether and which expert is required. This ensures that the technical assessment is independent and oriented towards the specific needs of the proceedings.

The court consults an expert if it cannot reliably assess certain facts without special expertise. It does not matter whether individual judges have the relevant knowledge. The only decisive factor is whether the court as a whole can make a reliable technical assessment. If there are doubts about this, the court must appoint an expert.

The appointment is made either ex officio or upon application by a party to the proceedings. Accused persons, defenders, or the public prosecutor’s office may request that an expert be consulted. However, the court always decides on this application. It examines whether the requested expert evidence is necessary to clarify the facts or whether the existing evidence is sufficient.

In the main hearing, the court calls on experts individually and examines them in the presence of all parties to the proceedings. The court conducts their questioning in accordance with the same rules that apply to other evidence collections. It is important to note that only court-appointed experts are authorized to draw binding technical conclusions. Personal assessments or private opinions have no evidentiary value.

Experts may be present during the examination of defendants and witnesses. This allows them to better follow the statements, recognize connections, and ask targeted follow-up questions. They can also comment on the results of the evidentiary proceedings, insofar as this is relevant to their field of expertise.

Questions for the expert

Parties to the proceedings may critically question the statements of the expert. They can confront them with differing scientific views and specifically point out doubts about their conclusions. This procedure is permissible and is part of a proper defense. The expert must answer these questions and provide a technical justification for their assessment.

If the expert is not immediately able to react to such objections, the court may interrupt or adjourn the main hearing. This applies in any case if it does not already become obvious that the expert lacks the necessary professional qualifications. The procedure should give them the opportunity to deal with the arguments presented in a factual manner.

If, after this examination, doubts about the technical conclusions remain and the expert cannot dispel them, the court must react. In this case, it consults another expert. The aim is to create a sustainable technical basis for the judicial decision and to clarify contradictory assessments.

Expert reports

The court may not simply read out written reports by court-appointed experts. The oral presentation of the report in the main hearing is decisive. The written report is only taken into account if the expert expressly refers to it in their presentation and thus makes it part of their oral statements. Other documents may also not be used to indirectly introduce the content of a report into the proceedings.

Private reports submitted by parties to the proceedings have a significantly limited meaning. The court does not have to include them in the file or read them out. They primarily serve to raise doubts about the statements of the court-appointed expert or to prepare targeted questions. However, they do not have an independent evidentiary effect.

Mandatory involvement of certain experts

In certain criminal proceedings, the court must necessarily consult an expert.

This applies, among other things, when it comes to the possible placement of a person in a specialized institution. In such cases, the court decides not only on guilt but also on the dangerousness and mental state of the person concerned. The court cannot reliably answer these questions without technical support. Therefore, it necessarily consults an expert in the field of psychiatry.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Impartiality and professional suitability

Experts must be independent and impartial. The same principles apply to them as to judges and other parties to the proceedings. If there are doubts about their impartiality or their professional suitability, the court must not continue to use them. In such cases, it must act on its own initiative or react to corresponding objections.

The mere fact that an expert was already active in the preliminary investigation does not, however, constitute bias. Rather, the decisive factor is whether concrete indications exist that the expert is no longer impartial or is not sufficiently qualified. The court must carefully examine this question, as the report can have a significant influence on the decision-making process.

Private experts

Accused persons have the right to obtain technical support. They may consult their own expert person for the questioning of a court-appointed expert. This gives the defense the opportunity to directly question and critically accompany technical statements.

Private reports occupy a special position in criminal proceedings. In principle, the court does not have to include such reports in the file or read them out in the main hearing. They primarily serve as a means of preparing targeted questions or motions for the taking of evidence. If the court nevertheless decides to consider a private report and read it out in the main hearing, it becomes part of the evidentiary proceedings.

Your Benefits with Legal Assistance

Legal support ensures that technical reports are not left unchecked and that your rights are protected.

In the main hearing, legal support ensures that the report is critically questioned. The defender prepares the questioning carefully, uncovers contradictions, and demands comprehensible justifications.

• Critical questioning of reports
• Legal certainty
• Support throughout the entire proceedings

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation