Escape risk - Fluchtgefahr

In addition to the urgent suspicion and proportionality, the risk of flight is one of the three prerequisites for ordering pre- trial detention in accordance with Section 112 (2) No. 2 StPO (Germany).


The risk of escape must result from certain facts that are determined in the free evidence procedure. From the concept of danger it follows that - unlike the feature of escape - it is sufficient for the order if there is a predominant [1] or at least a higher [2] probability that the accused will evade the proceedings than that he would be available for the proceedings. The conviction that the accused will actually flee is not a prerequisite for this criterion. It is irrelevant that the accused is in criminal detention / custody in another matter, because it depends on the prognosis as to whether the accused will flee after his release from prison. The decision-making horizon of the investigating authorities or the investigating judge is relevant .


As part of the decision-making process, all circumstances that speak for or against the risk of escape must be weighed up. The amount of the expected punishment on the one hand and the social ties of the accused on the other hand are important considerations. As a rule, one aspect alone will not justify the risk of escape. The aspect of the status of foreigners or the expectation of punishment is considered in isolation without any meaningfulness, because it always depends on an overall view. The expected revocation of a suspended sentence can also create a risk of flight.


According to a recent decision by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (ECHR), it is disputed whether a legally binding judgment must already be available with regard to the new offense during the probation period ( Section 56f (1) No. 1 StGB ) . [3]


Wiktionary: Danger of fleeing - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. OLG Karlsruhe , decision of February 26, 2010, file number 2 Ws 60/10 .
  2. Kammergericht , decision of November 3, 2011, file number 4 Ws 96/11 = NJOZ 2012, 1091, beck-online.
  3. method Bohemian against Germany ECHR No. 37568/97. Defense lawyer born in 2003, p. 82 online