Investigations
What does “judicial police” mean, and is it a police force?
One term, at least three different things. In France it is a legal function exercised by designated personnel; in Brazil an institutional role held by named forces; in Italy personnel drawn from other forces who fall under judicial direction. It almost never means police employed by the judiciary.
In short
Judicial police — police judiciaire, polizia giudiziaria, polícia judiciária, policía judicial — is one of the most reliably mistranslated terms in comparative criminal justice. The English words suggest police who work for the courts. That is not what it means in any system on this page.
Why it exists
The term exists to mark a distinction most systems need: the same officers who patrol streets and keep order also gather evidence for criminal proceedings, and those two activities answer to different authorities. Judicial police names the second activity, and the label carries the answerability with it.
AnalysisThat is why the term is legal rather than organisational in several systems. It is describing a capacity in which someone acts, not the building they work in.
How it works
- France — a function, not an agency
- Article 12 of the Code de procédure pénale provides that "la police judiciaire est exercée, sous la direction du procureur de la République, par les officiers, fonctionnaires et agents désignés au présent titre". Two things follow. Investigation is legally directed by a magistrate of the parquet. And who may exercise the function is a matter of legal designation — which is why personnel from more than one institution, including both the police nationale and the gendarmerie nationale, can carry it out. English-language writing that treats police judiciaire as the name of a single French detective agency is making the most common structural error about French criminal investigation.
- Brazil — an institutional role with a named office-holder
- Article 4 of the Código de Processo Penal provides that "a polícia judiciária será exercida pelas autoridades policiais" with the purpose of "a apuração das infrações penais e da sua autoria". In practice that means the state Polícia Civil for ordinary crime and the Polícia Federal for federal offences, each led by a delegado de polícia. Here the term attaches to identifiable forces and a defined office — much closer to an institution than the French usage, and still not a translation of “detective police”.
- Italy — personnel under judicial direction
- The judicial police are personnel drawn from the Polizia di Stato, the Arma dei Carabinieri and the Guardia di Finanza. Article 109 of the Constitution provides that judicial authorities may directly avail themselves of the judicial police, and Article 17 of Law 121/1981 provides that judicial-police functions are carried out under the dependence and direction of the judicial authority.
- Spain — a capacity in which several different forces act
- Which force investigates depends on where the offence happens: the Mossos d’Esquadra and the Ertzaintza in Catalonia and the Basque Country, the Policía Foral in Navarre, and the Cuerpo Nacional de Policía and Guardia Civil elsewhere. All of them act as judicial police under the direction of an investigating judge and the Ministerio Fiscal. The identity of the force varies by community; the capacity and the direction do not.
- Japan — an official status under the code
- Police investigating offences under the Code of Criminal Procedure act as judicial police officials. The status is conferred by the code and describes the capacity in which they investigate.
Belgium shows what happens when the term is attached to a standing organisation and the organisation is then abolished. Before 2001 Belgium had a separate judicial police attached to the prosecutors’ offices, alongside the gendarmerie and the municipal police. The Law of 7 December 1998 merged all three into a single integrated service on federal and local levels with effect from 1 January 2001. A reader who meets the Belgian judicial police in an older text is meeting a body that no longer exists.
Common misconceptions
Widely held beliefs that do not match how the system actually operates.
Common belief: Judicial police are police employed by the judiciary.
In practice: Not in any system on this page. In France the personnel belong to the police nationale, the gendarmerie and other bodies; in Italy to the national police forces; in Brazil to the Polícia Civil and Polícia Federal. What the judiciary or the parquet holds is direction, not employment.
Common belief: Judicial police is the local term for detectives.
In practice: The French term is a legal function that designated officers exercise, not a job title. Detective as a role is a different subject, and this site treats it as one.
Common belief: Because several countries use the term, judicial police is a global institution type.
In practice: The opposite conclusion follows from the evidence. A function, an institutional role and a personnel status cannot be one institution family, which is why this is a page about a term rather than an entry in the institution taxonomy.
Common belief: Judicial police exist wherever there is a civil-law system.
In practice: Germany allocates investigation between the prosecution and the Land police under sections 160 and 163 of the Strafprozessordnung without using this category to do it.
How this varies between jurisdictions
A required section on every guide. Arrangements differ between countries, and we say how.
The most reliable way to read the term in an unfamiliar system is to ask three questions of it, because the answers differ even among systems that share the words.
- Is it a function someone exercises, a status someone holds, or an organisation someone belongs to?
- Who directs it — a prosecutor, a judge, or a police hierarchy?
- Does the personnel remain in their home force while exercising it?
AnalysisFor France the answers are: a function, the procureur, yes. For Brazil: an institutional role, the police authority itself with the Ministério Público holding the action and external control, yes. For Italy: a status, the judicial authority, yes. Three systems, three different first answers.
Rights and accountability
AnalysisThe reason the distinction matters beyond translation is that it determines who is answerable for an investigative act. Where the function is directed by a magistrate, an act done badly is a failure within the magistracy’s responsibility. Where it belongs to a police institution, it is that institution’s.
What we could not establish
- This page explains what the term denotes in the systems researched. It is not a claim that these systems form a single institutional family — the evidence is that they do not, which is why this is a page about terminology rather than an institution type.
- Portugal’s and Belgium’s arrangements are stated only as far as their sources establish. The detailed statutory allocation among Portuguese criminal police bodies was read only in part.
Where to go next
Related: police and prosecutor investigation, the investigating judge, and France.
Related topics
- What is the difference between a police investigation and a prosecutor-led investigation?
Systems differ on who owns an investigation, who performs it, and who may direct whom. These are three separate questions, and the answers do not track each other — the body doing the work is frequently not the body responsible for it.
- Who is legally responsible for investigating a crime?
“The police” is an incomplete answer almost everywhere. Legal responsibility for an investigation may rest with police, with a prosecutor, or with a judge — and the body that performs the work is often not the body that owns it.
- What is an investigating judge, and do all civil-law systems have one?
Two incompatible offices share this English name. In France and Belgium a judge conducts an investigation. In Germany a judge acts on the prosecution’s application and checks whether the requested act is lawful. Both are officially called investigating judges.
Where this connects
Institutions: National police, Gendarmerie, Prosecution service.
Sources
Article 12 du Code de procédure pénale
République française (Légifrance) · Legislation · 1958-04-08 · link verified 2026-07-24
Supports the exact wording that the police judiciaire is exercised 'sous la direction du procureur de la République' by the officers, officials and agents designated in that title. Légifrance records the provision as in force from 8 April 1958 and as scheduled for repeal by Ordonnance n° 2025-1091 of 19 November 2025 with effect from 1 January 2029; any citation must state that it is current law carrying a scheduled end date. Does NOT support any claim about which bodies those designated officers belong to, nor about investigative practice.
Ministère de la justice (France) · Government publication · link verified 2026-07-24
Supports: the definition of the parquet / ministère public; the 'magistrature debout' description and the siège/parquet distinction; the hierarchy from procureur général to procureur de la République; that parquet magistrates act 'sous l'autorité du ministre de la Justice' and receive 'des instructions générales du ministre de la Justice mais en aucun cas dans les dossiers judiciaires'; that they do not benefit from the guarantee of inamovibilité; and the prosecutor's direction of investigation and discretion over case outcomes. An official self-description of the formal rule. It does NOT establish that the rule is observed in practice, and cannot settle the contested question of prosecutorial independence in either direction.
Código de Processo Penal — Decreto-Lei nº 3.689, de 3 de outubro de 1941
Presidência da República — Casa Civil (Planalto) · Legislation · 1941-10-03 · link verified 2026-07-25
The authoritative Portuguese text, read in full. Supports the structure of criminal investigation: the polícia judiciária 'será exercida pelas autoridades policiais' and has the purpose of 'a apuração das infrações penais e da sua autoria' (Art. 4), and the inquérito policial 'acompanhará a denúncia ou queixa, sempre que servir de base a uma ou outra' (Art. 12) — the police investigation feeds, but is distinct from, the charging instrument. Does not itself establish the constitutional police/MP structure (Art. 144 / 129). Portuguese authoritative.
Competências da Polícia Federal
Polícia Federal — gov.br (Ministério da Justiça e Segurança Pública) · Institutional (self-description) · link verified 2026-07-25
The Polícia Federal's own page, read in full. Supports that the PF is a Union body that exercises, 'com exclusividade, as funções de polícia judiciária da União', carries out 'polícia marítima, aeroportuária e de fronteiras', and works to 'reprimir o tráfico ilícito de entorpecentes e drogas afins, o contrabando e o descaminho' — reproducing Art. 144 §1. Establishes the PF's federal remit (federal crimes, borders, drugs); does not cover the state forces.
Constitution of the Italian Republic (1948) — official English translation
Corte costituzionale (Constitutional Court of the Italian Republic) · Legislation · 1948 · link verified 2026-07-26
The Constitutional Court's own official English translation (October 2023 edition), fetched as a PDF and text-extracted (confirmed by the research and verification passes; the Senate's English PDF was bot-walled, so this Court edition was substituted). Supports Art. 101 (justice administered in the name of the people; the judiciary subject only to the law), Art. 104 (the judiciary an independent branch; the High Council of the Judiciary/CSM), Art. 107 (the public prosecutor's guarantees), Art. 109 ("judicial authorities may directly avail themselves of the judicial police"), Art. 112 ("the public prosecutor shall have the obligation to initiate criminal proceedings" — mandatory prosecution), Art. 103 (the Council of State and administrative justice), Art. 116 (the five special-autonomy regions, with additional devolution over "justice" limited to the organizational requirements of the Justice of the Peace), Art. 117(2) — subparagraphs (l) "jurisdiction and procedural law; civil and criminal law; administrative justice", (h) "public order and security, save for local administrative police", (d) defence — establishing that all four justice functions are EXCLUSIVE State competence, and Arts. 134–135 (the Constitutional Court).
Law No. 121 of 1 April 1981 (new organisation of the public-security administration)
Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri — Ufficio Studi (official government text) · Legislation · 1981-04-01 · link verified 2026-07-26
The official government text of Law 121/1981, fetched as a PDF and text-extracted, verified verbatim in both passes. Art. 16 lists the police forces: the Polizia di Stato plus "a) l'Arma dei carabinieri, quale forza armata in servizio permanente di pubblica sicurezza; b) il Corpo della guardia di finanza", and (Art. 16(2)) the custodial and forestry corps. Art. 17 provides that judicial-police functions "sono svolte alla dipendenza e sotto la direzione dell'autorità giudiziaria" (are carried out under the dependence and direction of the judicial authority). Establishes the multiple national police forces and that criminal investigation is directed by the prosecuting magistracy.
Boletín Oficial del Estado (boe.es), BOE-A-1978-31229 · Legislation · 1978-12-29 · link verified 2026-07-26
The authoritative Castilian text, read in full. Supports: art. 2 (the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation and the right to autonomy of the nationalities and regions); art. 137 (the State organised into municipalities, provinces and Autonomous Communities); art. 145.1 ('En ningún caso se admitirá la federación de Comunidades Autónomas' — federation is constitutionally forbidden, so Spain is a decentralised UNITARY state); art. 148 (competences the Communities MAY assume) and art. 149.1 (the State's EXCLUSIVE competences), including art. 149.1.6 ('Legislación mercantil, penal y penitenciaria; legislación procesal' — criminal, penitentiary and procedural LEGISLATION is exclusively the State's), art. 149.1.5 (Administration of Justice), and art. 149.1.29 (public security, 'sin perjuicio de la posibilidad de creación de policías por las Comunidades Autónomas' — the basis for autonomous police); art. 104 (security forces under the Government); art. 117.5 ('El principio de unidad jurisdiccional es la base de la organización y funcionamiento de los Tribunales' — judicial unity); art. 122 (the Consejo General del Poder Judicial as the judiciary's governing body); art. 123 (the Tribunal Supremo, 'con jurisdicción en toda España, es el órgano jurisdiccional superior en todos los órdenes'); art. 124 (the Ministerio Fiscal, national, acting under unidad de actuación y dependencia jerárquica); art. 152.1 (a Tribunal Superior de Justicia culminating the judicial organisation in each community, without prejudice to the Supreme Court); and arts. 24-25 (due-process and penal principles). WAVE 19 ADDITION, read from the same authoritative Castilian text. Supports art. 53.1, that the rights and liberties recognised in Chapter Two bind all public powers and may be regulated only by law respecting their essential content, protected in accordance with art. 161.1.a); and art. 53.2 in terms: "Cualquier ciudadano podrá recabar la tutela de las libertades y derechos reconocidos en el artículo 14 y la Sección primera del Capítulo segundo ante los Tribunales ordinarios por un procedimiento basado en los principios de preferencia y sumariedad y, en su caso, a través del recurso de amparo ante el Tribunal Constitucional" — protection is sought first before the ORDINARY courts by a preferential and summary procedure, and where appropriate thereafter by amparo before the Constitutional Court. Supports art. 54, that an organic law regulates the Defensor del Pueblo as high commissioner of the Cortes Generales for the defence of the rights in that Title, who may supervise the activity of the Administration and reports to the Cortes. Cited for the SEQUENCE — ordinary courts first, constitutional court where appropriate — and not for any claim about admissibility criteria or outcomes. WAVE 20 ADDITION. Read from the same authoritative Castilian text on the BOE. Spain writes the emergency architecture into the constitution itself in more detail than almost any system in this wave. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 116(1): “1. Una ley orgánica regulará los estados de alarma, de excepción y de sitio, y las competencias y limitaciones correspondientes.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 116(2), (3) and (4): “2. El estado de alarma será declarado por el Gobierno mediante decreto acordado en Consejo de Ministros por un plazo máximo de quince días, dando cuenta al Congreso de los Diputados, reunido inmediatamente al efecto y sin cuya autorización no podrá ser prorrogado dicho plazo. El decreto determinará el ámbito territorial a que se extienden los efectos de la declaración. 3. El estado de excepción será declarado por el Gobierno mediante decreto acordado en Consejo de Ministros, previa autorización del Congreso de los Diputados. La autorización y proclamación del estado de excepción deberá determinar expresamente los efectos del mismo, el ámbito territorial a que se extiende y su duración, que no podrá exceder de treinta días, prorrogables por otro plazo igual, con los mismos requisitos. 4. El estado de sitio será declarado por la mayoría absoluta del Congreso de los Diputados, a propuesta exclusiva del Gobierno. El Congreso determinará su ámbito territorial, duración y condiciones.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 55(1): “1. Los derechos reconocidos en los artículos 17, 18, apartados 2 y 3, artículos 19, 20, apartados 1, a) y d), y 5, artículos 21, 28, apartado 2, y artículo 37, apartado 2, podrán ser suspendidos cuando se acuerde la declaración del estado de excepción o de sitio en los términos previstos en la Constitución. Se exceptúa de lo establecido anteriormente el apartado 3 del artículo 17 para el supuesto de declaración de estado de excepción.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 116(5); cf. Ley Orgánica 4/1981 Art. 1.Cuatro ("La declaración de los estados de alarma, excepción y sitio no interrumpe el normal funcionamiento de los poderes constitucionales del Estado."): “5. No podrá procederse a la disolución del Congreso mientras estén declarados algunos de los estados comprendidos en el presente artículo, quedando automáticamente convocadas las Cámaras si no estuvieren en período de sesiones. Su funcionamiento, así como el de los demás poderes constitucionales del Estado, no podrán interrumpirse durante la vigencia de estos estados. Disuelto el Congreso o expirado su mandato, si se produjere alguna de las situaciones que dan lugar a cualquiera de dichos estados, las competencias del Congreso serán asumidas por su Diputación Permanente.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 117(5)-(6); Ley Orgánica 4/1981 Art. 35 ("En la declaración del estado de sitio el Congreso de los Diputados podrá determinar los delitos que durante su vigencia quedan sometidos a la Jurisdicción Militar."): “5. El principio de unidad jurisdiccional es la base de la organización y funcionamiento de los Tribunales. La ley regulará el ejercicio de la jurisdicción militar en el ámbito estrictamente castrense y en los supuestos de estado de sitio, de acuerdo con los principios de la Constitución. 6. Se prohíben los Tribunales de excepción.”. Cited for the three graded regimes, the closed list of suspendable rights and the express bar on suspension under the estado de alarma, the institutional-continuity guarantee, and the confinement of military jurisdiction. It records no declaration and supports no claim about any other country.WAVE 21 ADDITION. Read from the same BOE consolidated text, article by article. Supports Art. 17(1)-(4): “1. Toda persona tiene derecho a la libertad y a la seguridad. Nadie puede ser privado de su libertad, sino con la observancia de lo establecido en este artículo y en los casos y en la forma previstos en la ley. 2. La detención preventiva no podrá durar más del tiempo estrictamente necesario para la realización de las averiguaciones tendentes al esclarecimiento de los hechos, y, en todo caso, en el plazo máximo de setenta y dos horas, el detenido deberá ser puesto en libertad o a disposición de la autoridad judicial. 3. Toda persona detenida debe ser informada de forma inmediata, y de modo que le sea comprensible, de sus derechos y de las razones de su detención, no pudiendo ser obligada a declarar. Se garantiza la asistencia de abogado al detenido en las diligencias policiales y judiciales, en los términos que la ley establezca. 4. La ley regulará un procedimiento de «habeas corpus» [...]” Supports Art. 18(1)-(4): “1. Se garantiza el derecho al honor, a la intimidad personal y familiar y a la propia imagen. 2. El domicilio es inviolable. Ninguna entrada o registro podrá hacerse en él sin consentimiento del titular o resolución judicial, salvo en caso de flagrante delito. 3. Se garantiza el secreto de las comunicaciones y, en especial, de las postales, telegráficas y telefónicas, salvo resolución judicial. 4. La ley limitará el uso de la informática para garantizar el honor y la intimidad personal y familiar de los ciudadanos y el pleno ejercicio de sus derechos.” Supports Art. 19, and specifically its rights-holder wording: “Los españoles tienen derecho a elegir libremente su residencia y a circular por el territorio nacional” — against Art. 17(1)'s “Toda persona”. Supports Art. 24(1)-(2), including the right to effective judicial protection without indefensión, and the rights “al Juez ordinario predeterminado por la ley, a la defensa y a la asistencia de letrado, a ser informados de la acusación formulada contra ellos, a un proceso público sin dilaciones indebidas y con todas las garantías, a utilizar los medios de prueba pertinentes para su defensa, a no declarar contra sí mismos, a no confesarse culpables y a la presunción de inocencia”. Supports Art. 24(1) verbatim, including the phrase quoted on the equality-of-arms page: “1. Todas las personas tienen derecho a obtener la tutela efectiva de los jueces y tribunales en el ejercicio de sus derechos e intereses legítimos, sin que, en ningún caso, pueda producirse indefensión.” Supports Art. 53(1) AND 53(2): “1. Los derechos y libertades reconocidos en el Capítulo segundo del presente Título vinculan a todos los poderes públicos. Sólo por ley, que en todo caso deberá respetar su contenido esencial, podrá regularse el ejercicio de tales derechos y libertades, que se tutelarán de acuerdo con lo previsto en el artículo 161, 1, a). 2. Cualquier ciudadano podrá recabar la tutela de las libertades y derechos reconocidos en el artículo 14 y la Sección primera del Capítulo segundo ante los Tribunales ordinarios por un procedimiento basado en los principios de preferencia y sumariedad y, en su caso, a través del recurso de amparo ante el Tribunal Constitucional.” Constitutional text only — no decision of the Tribunal Constitucional, no provision of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal, nothing about any other country.
Ley Orgánica 2/1986, de 13 de marzo, de Fuerzas y Cuerpos de Seguridad
Boletín Oficial del Estado (boe.es), BOE-A-1986-6859 · Legislation · 1986-03-13 · link verified 2026-07-26
The organic law of the security forces, read in full for the relevant articles. Supports the THREE tiers of security forces: the Fuerzas y Cuerpos de Seguridad del Estado (national), the police of the Autonomous Communities, and the local police. Names the two national forces (art. 9): 'a) El Cuerpo Nacional de Policía, que es un Instituto Armado de naturaleza civil, dependiente del Ministro del Interior. b) La Guardia Civil, que es un Instituto Armado de naturaleza militar...' — so the Guardia Civil is a militarily-organised force, not merely rural police. Provides the framework within which the Autonomous Communities that so provide in their Statutes create their own police forces.
Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法), English translation
Ministry of Justice (Japanese Law Translation database) · Legislation · 1948 · link verified 2026-07-25
Cited from the official Japanese Law Translation database (reference only; original Japanese text has legal effect). Supports, at the structural level: that police officials act as judicial police officials investigating offences (Article 189); that public prosecutors may themselves investigate offences (Article 191); and that prosecution is instituted by a public prosecutor (Article 247), who holds the discretion whether to prosecute. Supports the allocation of investigative and charging responsibility; the English is not authoritative and no operational detail is drawn from it. WAVE 22 ADDITION. Read again from the same Japanese Law Translation page, this time from the database's own XML export of the Code (s23Aa001310201en2.0_h18A36.xml), fetched with the law page as referrer. TEMPORAL LIMITATION, stated because it is load-bearing for this wave: the version identifier indicates a translation reflecting amendments to 2006, so it MAY LAG later amendments, and only structural propositions present in that version are drawn from it. Supports Art. 197(1): with regard to investigation, “such examination as is necessary to achieve its objective may be conducted; provided, however, that compulsory dispositions shall not be applied unless special provisions have been established in this Code.” Supports Art. 218(1), that a public prosecutor, a public prosecutor's assistant officer or a judicial police official may, if necessary for investigation of an offense, conduct search, seizure or inspection UPON A WARRANT ISSUED BY A JUDGE, and Art. 218(3), that the warrant is issued upon their request. Supports Art. 219(1), that the warrant shall contain the name of the suspect or accused, the charged offense, THE ARTICLES TO BE SEIZED or the place, body or articles to be searched, the place or articles to be inspected, the valid period, and a statement that the search, seizure or inspection shall not be commenced after the lapse of that period and that the warrant shall then be returned to the court. Supports Art. 222-2 in full: “Compulsory measures for the interception of electronic communications without the consent of either party shall be executed based upon other acts.” Cited for three propositions: that a national code can state as a general rule that a compulsory measure requires a specific statutory provision; that the warrant instrument itself distinguishes what may be seized from what may be searched; and that a system may place the interception power OUTSIDE its general procedure code. The Act to which Art. 222-2 refers was NOT read, and this record supports no claim about its content. The English is a reference translation and the Japanese text has legal effect.
National justice systems — Belgium (European e-Justice Portal)
European Commission (European e-Justice Portal) · International organisation · link verified 2026-07-26
The European Commission's e-Justice portal page on Belgium, read directly. Supports the ordinary-court hierarchy — courts of first instance across 12 judicial districts, five courts of appeal ("Brussels, Liege, Mons, Ghent and Antwerp"), and the Court of Cassation (Cour de cassation / Hof van Cassatie) at the apex; the prosecution as the "State Counsel's Office or Prosecutor's Office (ministère public / openbaar ministerie)", the "standing judges" (magistrature debout / staande magistratuur, the parquet / parket) distinct from the "sitting judges" who adjudicate; and Article 151(1) on the independence of judges. An intergovernmental (EU) source describing Belgium.
Law 49/2008 — Organisation of Criminal Investigation (LOIC), consolidated text
Diário da República (via the Polícia Judiciária official site) · Legislation · 2008-08-27 · link verified 2026-07-26
The consolidated LOIC text (an official Diário da República version hosted on the Polícia Judiciária site), fetched as a PDF and text-extracted, verified verbatim. Supports Art. 2(1) ("a direcção da investigação cabe à autoridade judiciária competente em cada fase do processo" — direction of the investigation belongs to the competent judicial authority at each stage) and Art. 2(4) (the criminal-police bodies act under the direction and functional dependence of that authority); Art. 3(1) naming the three general-competence criminal-police bodies — the Polícia Judiciária (PJ), the Guarda Nacional Republicana (GNR) and the Polícia de Segurança Pública (PSP); and Art. 7(2) reserving the most serious crimes to the Polícia Judiciária.
Strafprozessordnung (StPO) § 160 — Pflicht zur Sachverhaltsaufklärung (German original text)
Bundesministerium der Justiz / Bundesamt für Justiz (Gesetze im Internet) · Legislation · link verified 2026-07-24
Authoritative German text. Supports § 160(1): once the Staatsanwaltschaft learns of a suspected offence it must investigate the facts in order to decide whether to bring a public charge; and § 160(2): it must investigate exculpatory as well as incriminating circumstances and secure evidence. Supports the allocation of investigative responsibility and the objectivity duty. Does NOT support any description of investigative technique, thresholds, or practice.
Bundesministerium der Justiz / Bundesamt für Justiz (Gesetze im Internet) · Legislation · link verified 2026-07-24
Authoritative German text. Supports § 163(1): the authorities and officials of the police service must investigate offences and take all measures that permit no delay in order to prevent the matter being obscured. Supports that the police hold their own statutory first-access investigative duty alongside the prosecution's direction. Does NOT support operational detail of any kind.