PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 23279/14) against the Federal Republic of Germany lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a German national, Mr Karl-Heinz Bergmann (“the applicant”), on 18 March 2014.

The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was represented by Mr A. Sommerfeld, a lawyer practising in Soest (Germany). The German Government (“the Government”) were represented by two of their Agents, Mr H.-J. Behrens and Mrs K. Behr, of the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection.

The applicant alleged that the retrospective prolongation of his preventive detention, in the Rosdorf centre for persons in preventive detention, beyond the former statutory ten-year maximum duration breached his right to liberty under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention and the prohibition on retrospective punishment under Article 7 § 1 of the Convention.

On 17 June 2014 the application was communicated to the Government.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1943 and is currently detained in the centre for persons in preventive detention on the premises of Rosdorf Prison (hereinafter the “Rosdorf preventive detention centre”).

A. The applicant’s previous convictions, the order for his preventive detention and its enforcement

Between 1966 and 1984, the applicant was convicted by the criminal courts five times. He was found guilty of sexual assault of a seven-year-old girl and attempted rape of a fourteen-year-old girl, committed under the influence of alcohol, and of attempted sexual acts with a thirteen-year-old boy. He was found to have committed other unlawful acts, including arson and strangulating a ten-year-old boy during a burglary, but was not held criminally liable because he had been drunk. He was sentenced, in particular, to terms of imprisonment ranging from six months to ten years.

On 18 April 1986 the Hanover Regional Court convicted the applicant of two counts of attempted murder, combined with attempted rape in one case, and of two counts of dangerous assault. It sentenced him to fifteen years’ imprisonment and ordered his preventive detention under Article 66 § 2 of the Criminal Code (see paragraph 46 below).

The Regional Court found that between 7 July 1985 and 3 October 1985, the applicant had stabbed a nineteen-year-old female cyclist in the back in a life-threatening manner for sexual gratification; had stabbed a male cyclist he had mistaken for a woman twice in the back and at the temple, again for sexual gratification; and had stabbed a twenty‑three ‑year‑old woman three times in a life-threatening manner in an attempt to rape her. He had committed those offences under the influence of alcohol in a park in Hanover. Still drunk, he had then broken into a house, strangulated a four-year-old girl and had injured her with a knife below the waist for sexual gratification. He was arrested on 9 October 1985.

Having consulted two medical experts, the Regional Court found that at the time of committing the offences, the applicant had been in a state of diminished criminal responsibility (Article 21 of the Criminal Code, see paragraph 62 below). He was diagnosed with sexual deviance, a personality disorder and psycho-organic syndrome, which was probably a consequence of his longstanding alcohol abuse. As long as the applicant did not drink alcohol, those abnormalities did not affect his criminal responsibility as he was able to control his aggression. However, combined with the consumption of alcohol, they led to his criminal responsibility being diminished.

The Regional Court decided to order the applicant’s preventive detention under Article 66 § 2 of the Criminal Code. It considered that as a result of his personality disorder, the applicant had a propensity to commit serious offences which seriously harmed the victims both physically and mentally. As confirmed by the two medical experts, there was a high risk that if released, the applicant would commit further violent offences for sexual gratification under the influence of alcohol, similar to those of which he had been found guilty. He therefore presented a danger to the general public.

Lastly, the Regional Court decided not to order the applicant’s detention in a psychiatric hospital under Article 63 of the Criminal Code (see paragraph 63 below). The court endorsed the experts’ finding that the applicant’s personality disorder could no longer be treated because his sexually deviant aggressive behaviour had lasted for decades and because he would be unable to pursue psychotherapy in view of his limited intellectual capacity. Public security could therefore be better safeguarded by placing the applicant in preventive detention.

The applicant served his full term of imprisonment, and on 12 June 2001 he was placed for the first time in preventive detention, for which he was held in a wing of Celle prison. By 11 June 2011 he had served ten years in preventive detention.

The courts responsible for the execution of sentences ordered the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention at regular intervals. In particular, the Lüneburg Regional Court ordered the continuation of his detention on 13 May 2011 and 5 October 2012.

B. The proceedings at issue

1. The decision of the Lüneburg Regional Court

On 26 July 2013 the Lüneburg Regional Court, sitting as a chamber responsible for the execution of sentences, ordered the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention. The Regional Court further ordered the Rosdorf Prison authorities to offer the applicant, within three months of the date on which its decision became final, a specific anti-hormonal therapy with medication aimed at reducing his sadistic fantasies and his libido, and thus his dangerousness. The court had consulted the Celle Prison authorities and the prosecution and had heard the applicant in person as well as his counsel, who represented him throughout the proceedings before the domestic courts.

The Regional Court considered that the requirements for ordering the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention laid down in the second sentence of section 316f(2) of the Introductory Act to the Criminal Code (see paragraph 53 below) had been met.

The Regional Court confirmed that the said transitional provision was applicable to the applicant’s case. It noted that at the time of his last offence on 3 October 1985, the applicant’s first placement in preventive detention could not exceed ten years. It was only following the entry into force of the Combating of Sexual Offences and Other Dangerous Offences Act on 31 January 1998 (see paragraph 51 below) that the courts responsible for the execution of sentences could prolong preventive detention without any maximum duration. The applicant therefore fell within the category of detainees whose preventive detention had been prolonged retrospectively, as defined by the Federal Constitutional Court in its judgment of 4 May 2011 (see paragraphs 66-72 below). The Regional Court further noted that the second sentence of section 316f(2) of the Introductory Act to the Criminal Code had regard to, and had taken up, the standards set up by the Federal Constitutional Court in the above-mentioned judgment for the continuation of retrospectively ordered or retrospectively prolonged preventive detention.

The Regional Court considered that, in accordance with section 316f(2) of the Introductory Act to the Criminal Code, the applicant suffered from a mental disorder for the purposes of section 1(1) of the Therapy Detention Act (see paragraph 64 below). It endorsed the findings made on that point by W., an external psychiatric expert it had consulted, in his report dated 8 June 2013. The expert had been obliged to draw up his report on the basis of the case files as the applicant had refused to be examined. Expert W. had confirmed that the applicant suffered from sexual sadism, a sexual deviance, and was addicted to alcohol, even though he had not drunk since being detained. The Regional Court stressed that expert W.’s assessment confirmed the findings made by a number of previous experts, notably those made in January and May 2011 by two experts who had diagnosed the applicant with a sexual preference disorder with sadomasochistic, fetishist and paedophiliac elements and with an alcohol addiction without current consumption of alcohol.

Furthermore, the Regional Court found that, as required by section 316f(2), second sentence, of the Introductory Act to the Criminal Code, there was still a very high risk that, owing to specific circumstances relating to his personality and his conduct, the applicant would if released commit the most serious sexually motivated violent offences, similar to those of which he had been convicted. Endorsing the findings of expert W., in accordance with the above-mentioned previous expert reports, the court noted that the applicant had admitted to his sadistic fantasies but had been unable to address them through therapy. In Celle Prison, he had stopped participating in any activities for persons in preventive detention. The Regional Court stressed that, in his assessment of the applicant’s dangerousness, the expert had taken into consideration his advanced age of sixty-nine years. However, he had convincingly explained that the applicant’s sexual deviance had not yet been considerably alleviated thereby. Furthermore, his alcohol addiction had not yet been treated adequately. However, the consumption of alcohol further increased the high risk that the applicant would commit sexual or violent offences again if released.

The Regional Court considered that the prolongation of the preventive detention of the applicant, who had been detained for almost thirty years, was still proportionate in view of the considerable threat he posed to the public. It noted in that context that the applicant’s detention in a supervised residence, which it had suggested in its previous decision, was not possible in practice.

As regards the order issued by the Regional Court, based on Article 67d § 2 of the Criminal Code, read in conjunction with Article 66c § 1 sub-paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code (see paragraphs 49 and 54 below), that the Rosdorf Prison authorities offer the applicant specific anti-hormonal therapy, the court found that that order was necessary to guarantee the applicant sufficient care while in preventive detention. Expert W. had stressed – as he had already done in 2012 – that the prison authorities must at least attempt to treat the applicant, who was willing to undergo treatment with medication. The anti-hormonal therapy to be offered had proved to diminish sadistic fantasies and the libido, and could therefore reduce the applicant’s dangerousness.

2. The decision of the Celle Court of Appeal

On 1 August 2013 the applicant lodged an appeal against the Regional Court’s decision, for which he submitted reasons on 14 August 2013. He argued, in particular, that his preventive detention, a penalty which had been prolonged retrospectively, failed to comply with the Convention.

On 2 September 2013 the Celle Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal. Endorsing the reasons given by the Regional Court, it confirmed that the requirements laid down in section 316f(2), second sentence, of the Introductory Act to the Criminal Code for ordering the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention had been met.

Taking into account the report submitted by expert W., the Court of Appeal held that the applicant was suffering from a mental disorder as defined in section 1(1) of the Therapy Detention Act. Referring to the Federal Constitutional Court’s case-law (see paragraphs 73-76 below), it found that a mental disorder under that Act did not require that the disorder was such as to diminish or exclude the criminal responsibility of the person concerned for the purposes of Articles 20 and 21 of the Criminal Code (see paragraphs 61-62 below). Specific disorders affecting a person’s personality, conduct, sexual preference and control of impulses were covered by the notion of “mental disorder” in section 1(1) of the Therapy Detention Act. The applicant’s sexual sadism and his alcohol addiction without current consumption of alcohol amounted to a mental disorder within the meaning of that provision.

Moreover, there was still a very high risk that, if released, the applicant would commit the most serious violent and sexual offences, similar to those of which he had been convicted, owing to specific circumstances relating to his personality and his conduct. The applicant’s dangerousness had not been reduced through therapy; nor had he become less dangerous by his advancing age. He currently did not participate in any serious therapeutic activities and kept trivialising his offences. Moreover, expert W. had confirmed that his mental illness was difficult to treat. The Court of Appeal further endorsed the Regional Court’s finding that the applicant’s continued detention was still proportionate, despite the considerable overall length of his detention.

3. The decision of the Federal Constitutional Court

On 24 September 2013 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with the Federal Constitutional Court against the decisions of the Lüneburg Regional Court and the Celle Court of Appeal. He claimed that the order for the continuation of his preventive detention violated his constitutional right to liberty, read in conjunction with the constitutional right to protection of legitimate expectations guaranteed in a State governed by the rule of law.

The applicant argued that under the European Court of Human Rights’ well-established case-law (he referred to M. v. Germany, no. 19359/04, ECHR 2009), the retrospective prolongation of a person’s preventive detention – a penalty – beyond the former ten-year time-limit breached the prohibition on retrospective punishment under Article 7 of the Convention and did not comply with sub-paragraph (a) of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention. Moreover, his continuing preventive detention could not be justified under sub-paragraph (e) of Article 5 § 1 either. He did not suffer from a mental disease as required by that provision. In addition, the notion and scope of “mental disorder” under the applicable provisions of domestic law and in the domestic courts’ case-law was unclear.

The applicant further stressed that the Regional Court had recommended his placement in a supervised residence. In those circumstances, his continued preventive detention on the premises of Rosdorf Prison was no longer proportionate. He conceded, however, that his detention in the new preventive detention centre on the premises of Rosdorf Prison complied with the constitutional requirement to differentiate between preventive detention and detention for serving a term of imprisonment.

On 29 October 2013 the Federal Constitutional Court declined to consider the applicant’s constitutional complaint without giving reasons (file no. 2 BvR 2182/13). The decision was served on the applicant’s counsel on 7 November 2013.

C. Parallel and further developments

On 5 December 2011 the Lüneburg Regional Court, civil section, ordered the applicant’s placement in Moringen Psychiatric Hospital under the Therapy Detention Act. It found that the applicant suffered from a mental disorder for the purposes of section 1 of that Act and that there was a high risk that, if released, he would commit further serious offences. On 31 January 2012 the Celle Court of Appeal quashed that decision on the grounds that detention under the Therapy Detention Act could only be ordered once the preventive detention of the person concerned had been terminated by a final decision.

On 25 April 2014 the Göttingen Regional Court, in a decision reviewing the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention, ordered the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention. It noted that the applicant had repeatedly refused treatment with medication to diminish his libido.

On 15 January 2015 the Göttingen Regional Court, having consulted medical expert J., again ordered the continuation of the applicant’s preventive detention under Article 67d § 3 of the Criminal Code, read in conjunction with section 316f(2), second sentence, of the Introductory Act to the Criminal Code (see paragraphs 51 and 53 below). On 24 April 2015 the Braunschweig Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal lodged by the applicant against the decision of the Regional Court.

D. The conditions of the applicant’s preventive detention

1. Conditions prior to the period of detention at issue

Until 20 February 2012 the applicant had been held in preventive detention in a wing of Celle Prison. He had participated in therapy with a psychologist between 2005 and 2010, but had then stopped that therapy. He had refused to participate in the alcohol addiction treatment programme offered to him or any other treatment measures.

On 20 February 2012 the applicant was transferred with his consent to a wing of Celle Prison for persons in preventive detention where a transitional concept had been adopted. The aim was to improve the available treatment options in the light of the duty to differentiate preventive detention and detention for serving a term of imprisonment, by reference to the European Court of Human Rights’ judgment in M. v. Germany (cited above) and the Federal Constitutional Court’s judgment of 4 May 2011 (see paragraphs 66-72 below). The applicant participated in group therapy sessions run by a doctor and in a social skills training course. He stopped attending the group for addicts and refused to take medication to reduce his libido for fear of side effects.

2. Conditions of detention at the relevant time

Since 2 June 2013 the applicant has been detained in the new Rosdorf centre for persons in preventive detention, a separate building constructed on the premises of Rosdorf Prison.

The conception of preventive detention in the centre was developed in order to comply with the constitutional requirement to differentiate between preventive detention and imprisonment, as defined in the Federal Constitutional Court’s judgment of 4 May 2011 (see paragraphs 67 and 70 below) and as further specified in the newly enacted Article 66c of the Criminal Code and in the Lower Saxony Preventive Detention Act (see paragraphs 54, 56-57 and 59-60 below).

Up to forty-five persons can be detained in the Rosdorf centre. Detainees are placed in apartment units measuring some 23 square metres containing two furnished rooms and a bathroom. With the exception of detainees posing a particular security risk, the detainees can move freely within the preventive detention building and on its outdoor premises from 6 a.m. to 9.45 p.m. They may furnish and paint their rooms, to which they have their own keys. The rooms are equipped with a controlled access to the internet including e-mail, telephone, television, CD and DVD player and radio. There are common rooms for residential groups consisting of some seven detainees, which include a kitchen, a dining room, a television room and rooms for games, handicraft work and exercise. The outdoor premises, measuring some 1,600 square metres, can be used for sports, recreation or gardening.

Persons in preventive detention in the Rosdorf centre may wear their own clothes. They can either take meals prepared by the centre’s staff or prepare their own meals (in which case they receive an allowance for purchasing food in the centre’s supermarket). Persons in preventive detention may work, but are not obliged to do so. They may receive visits regularly.

According to information furnished by the Government, at the relevant time the applicant was one of some thirty persons detained in the Rosdorf preventive detention centre. In order to comply with the duty to provide the necessary therapy and care and to motivate detainees to participate in the relevant therapies and treatment, the centre’s staff comprised one psychiatrist, four psychologists, five social workers and twenty-five members of the general prison service. The staffing situation was similar to that of Moringen Psychiatric Hospital, situated in the same Land and where persons were detained under Article 63 of the Criminal Code.

Detainees are examined at the beginning of preventive detention in order to determine the necessary therapy and care. A personal treatment plan (Vollzugsplan) is then drawn up.

According to the personal treatment plan drawn up for the applicant by the Rosdorf centre on 28 November 2014, it was noted that in the past, from July 2013 until August 2014, the applicant participated in group sessions aimed at preventing detainees from relapsing into excessive alcohol consumption. He then stopped attending the meetings. He also regularly participated in group sessions at which detainees discussed their experiences during leave from detention. He stopped participating in those meetings in August 2014 too, arguing that the participants were not granted sufficient additional leave. In addition, he had motivation meetings with a psychologist fortnightly until March 2014, when he stopped attending the meetings, alleging that the psychologist lacked experience. He took part in weekly residential group meetings from June 2013 until February 2014, when he stopped attending the meetings, arguing that his treatment plan did not meet his expectations. He did not take part in any structured leisure activities and spent most of his day alone watching television. He declined repeated invitations to take part in group sessions of the treatment programme for offenders. Thus, as from August 2014 the applicant no longer participated in any therapy measures. He proved reliable during leave from the detention centre under escort on a number of occasions.

According to the Rosdorf centre’s treatment plan for the applicant of 28 November 2014 and an internal note from a staff member of the centre, the applicant has refused regular and repeated offers to start a treatment with medication to reduce his libido, which had been recommended by expert W. in 2013, for fear of side effects. In December 2014 he showed willing for the first time to take up such treatment.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e1
001-159782_a11_em1
CODE
DIRECT
23279/14
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e2
001-159782_a11_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Republic of Germany
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e3
001-159782_a11_em3
DEM
NO_MASK
German
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e4
001-159782_a11_em4
PERSON
DIRECT
Mr Karl-Heinz Bergmann
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e5
001-159782_a11_em5
DATETIME
QUASI
18 March 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e6
001-159782_a11_em6
PERSON
QUASI
Mr A. Sommerfeld
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e7
001-159782_a11_em7
LOC
NO_MASK
Soest
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e8
001-159782_a11_em8
LOC
NO_MASK
Germany
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e2
001-159782_a11_em9
ORG
NO_MASK
001-159782_a11_em2
German Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e9
001-159782_a11_em10
PERSON
QUASI
Mr H.-J. Behrens
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e10
001-159782_a11_em11
PERSON
QUASI
Mrs K. Behr
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e11
001-159782_a11_em12
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em13
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e13
001-159782_a11_em14
DATETIME
NO_MASK
ten-year
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e14
001-159782_a11_em15
DATETIME
QUASI
17 June 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e15
001-159782_a11_em16
DATETIME
QUASI
1943
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e16
001-159782_a11_em17
ORG
QUASI
Rosdorf Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e17
001-159782_a11_em18
ORG
QUASI
Rosdorf preventive detention centre
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e18
001-159782_a11_em19
DATETIME
NO_MASK
Between 1966 and 1984
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e19
001-159782_a11_em20
DEM
QUASI
seven-year-old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e20
001-159782_a11_em21
DEM
QUASI
fourteen-year-old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e21
001-159782_a11_em22
DEM
QUASI
thirteen-year-old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e22
001-159782_a11_em23
MISC
QUASI
arson
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e23
001-159782_a11_em24
MISC
QUASI
strangulating
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e24
001-159782_a11_em25
DEM
QUASI
ten-year-old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e25
001-159782_a11_em26
MISC
QUASI
burglary
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e26
001-159782_a11_em27
DATETIME
NO_MASK
six months to ten years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e27
001-159782_a11_em28
DATETIME
QUASI
18 April 1986
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em29
ORG
QUASI
Hanover Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e29
001-159782_a11_em30
DATETIME
NO_MASK
fifteen years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em31
ORG
NO_MASK
001-159782_a11_em29
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e30
001-159782_a11_em32
DATETIME
QUASI
7 July 1985
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e31
001-159782_a11_em33
DATETIME
QUASI
3 October 1985
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e32
001-159782_a11_em34
DEM
QUASI
nineteen-year-old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e33
001-159782_a11_em35
DEM
QUASI
twenty‑three ‑year‑old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e34
001-159782_a11_em36
LOC
QUASI
Hanover
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e35
001-159782_a11_em37
DEM
QUASI
four-year-old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e36
001-159782_a11_em38
DATETIME
QUASI
9 October 1985
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em39
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e37
001-159782_a11_em40
DEM
QUASI
sexual deviance
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e38
001-159782_a11_em41
DEM
QUASI
personality disorder
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e39
001-159782_a11_em42
DEM
QUASI
psycho-organic syndrome
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e40
001-159782_a11_em43
DEM
QUASI
alcohol abuse
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em44
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e38
001-159782_a11_em45
DEM
QUASI
personality disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em46
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e38
001-159782_a11_em47
DEM
QUASI
personality disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e41
001-159782_a11_em48
DATETIME
NO_MASK
decades
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e42
001-159782_a11_em49
DATETIME
QUASI
12 June 2001
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e43
001-159782_a11_em50
ORG
QUASI
Celle prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e44
001-159782_a11_em51
DATETIME
QUASI
11 June 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e45
001-159782_a11_em52
DATETIME
NO_MASK
ten years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e46
001-159782_a11_em53
ORG
QUASI
Lüneburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e47
001-159782_a11_em54
DATETIME
QUASI
13 May 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e48
001-159782_a11_em55
DATETIME
QUASI
5 October 2012
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e46
001-159782_a11_em56
ORG
QUASI
Lüneburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e49
001-159782_a11_em57
DATETIME
QUASI
26 July 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e46
001-159782_a11_em58
ORG
QUASI
Lüneburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em59
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em60
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e50
001-159782_a11_em61
DATETIME
NO_MASK
three months of the date
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e51
001-159782_a11_em62
DEM
QUASI
anti-hormonal therapy
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e52
001-159782_a11_em63
ORG
QUASI
Celle Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em64
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em65
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e31
001-159782_a11_em66
DATETIME
QUASI
3 October 1985
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e45
001-159782_a11_em67
DATETIME
NO_MASK
ten years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e53
001-159782_a11_em68
DATETIME
QUASI
31 January 1998
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em69
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e55
001-159782_a11_em70
DATETIME
QUASI
4 May 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em71
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em72
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em73
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e56
001-159782_a11_em74
DEM
NO_MASK
mental disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em75
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e58
001-159782_a11_em76
DATETIME
QUASI
8 June 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em77
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e59
001-159782_a11_em78
DEM
QUASI
sexual sadism
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e37
001-159782_a11_em79
DEM
QUASI
sexual deviance
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e60
001-159782_a11_em80
DEM
QUASI
addicted to alcohol
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em81
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em82
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e61
001-159782_a11_em83
DATETIME
NO_MASK
January
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e62
001-159782_a11_em84
DATETIME
NO_MASK
May 2011
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e63
001-159782_a11_em85
DEM
QUASI
sexual preference disorder
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e64
001-159782_a11_em86
DEM
QUASI
sadomasochistic, fetishist and paedophiliac elements
HEALTH
insert
001-159782_a11_e65
001-159782_a11_em87
DEM
QUASI
alcohol addiction
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em88
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em89
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e52
001-159782_a11_em90
ORG
QUASI
Celle Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em91
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e66
001-159782_a11_em92
DEM
QUASI
sixty-nine years
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e37
001-159782_a11_em93
DEM
QUASI
sexual deviance
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e65
001-159782_a11_em94
DEM
QUASI
alcohol addiction
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em95
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e67
001-159782_a11_em96
DATETIME
NO_MASK
almost thirty years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em97
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em98
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e51
001-159782_a11_em99
DEM
QUASI
anti-hormonal therapy
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em100
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e68
001-159782_a11_em101
DATETIME
NO_MASK
2012
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e51
001-159782_a11_em102
DEM
QUASI
anti-hormonal therapy
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e69
001-159782_a11_em103
ORG
QUASI
Celle Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e70
001-159782_a11_em104
DATETIME
QUASI
1 August 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em105
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e71
001-159782_a11_em106
DATETIME
QUASI
14 August 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e72
001-159782_a11_em107
DATETIME
QUASI
2 September 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e69
001-159782_a11_em108
ORG
QUASI
Celle Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em109
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em110
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e56
001-159782_a11_em111
DEM
NO_MASK
mental disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em112
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e56
001-159782_a11_em113
DEM
NO_MASK
mental disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e56
001-159782_a11_em114
DEM
NO_MASK
mental disorder
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e59
001-159782_a11_em115
DEM
QUASI
sexual sadism
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e65
001-159782_a11_em116
DEM
QUASI
alcohol addiction
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e56
001-159782_a11_em117
DEM
NO_MASK
mental disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em118
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e73
001-159782_a11_em119
DEM
NO_MASK
mental illness
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em120
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em121
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e74
001-159782_a11_em122
DATETIME
QUASI
24 September 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em123
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e46
001-159782_a11_em124
ORG
QUASI
Lüneburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e69
001-159782_a11_em125
ORG
QUASI
Celle Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e75
001-159782_a11_em126
ORG
NO_MASK
European Court of Human Rights
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e76
001-159782_a11_em127
MISC
NO_MASK
M. v. Germany
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e77
001-159782_a11_em128
CODE
NO_MASK
19359/04
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e75
001-159782_a11_em129
ORG
NO_MASK
001-159782_a11_em126
ECHR
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e78
001-159782_a11_em130
DATETIME
NO_MASK
2009
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e13
001-159782_a11_em131
DATETIME
NO_MASK
ten-year
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e56
001-159782_a11_em132
DEM
NO_MASK
mental disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em133
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e16
001-159782_a11_em134
ORG
QUASI
Rosdorf Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e16
001-159782_a11_em135
ORG
QUASI
Rosdorf Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e79
001-159782_a11_em136
DATETIME
QUASI
29 October 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em137
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e80
001-159782_a11_em138
CODE
DIRECT
2182/13
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e81
001-159782_a11_em139
DATETIME
QUASI
7 November 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e82
001-159782_a11_em140
DATETIME
QUASI
5 December 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e46
001-159782_a11_em141
ORG
QUASI
Lüneburg Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-159782_a11_e83
001-159782_a11_em142
ORG
QUASI
Moringen Psychiatric Hospital
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e56
001-159782_a11_em143
DEM
NO_MASK
mental disorder
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e84
001-159782_a11_em144
DATETIME
QUASI
31 January 2012
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e69
001-159782_a11_em145
ORG
QUASI
Celle Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e85
001-159782_a11_em146
DATETIME
QUASI
25 April 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e86
001-159782_a11_em147
ORG
QUASI
Göttingen Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e87
001-159782_a11_em148
DATETIME
QUASI
15 January 2015
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e86
001-159782_a11_em149
ORG
QUASI
Göttingen Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e88
001-159782_a11_em150
PERSON
NO_MASK
J.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e89
001-159782_a11_em151
DATETIME
QUASI
24 April 2015
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e90
001-159782_a11_em152
ORG
QUASI
Braunschweig Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e28
001-159782_a11_em153
ORG
NO_MASK
Regional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e91
001-159782_a11_em154
DATETIME
QUASI
20 February 2012
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e52
001-159782_a11_em155
ORG
QUASI
Celle Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e92
001-159782_a11_em156
DATETIME
NO_MASK
between 2005 and 2010
HEALTH
check
001-159782_a11_e65
001-159782_a11_em157
DEM
QUASI
alcohol addiction
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e91
001-159782_a11_em158
DATETIME
QUASI
20 February 2012
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e52
001-159782_a11_em159
ORG
QUASI
Celle Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e75
001-159782_a11_em160
ORG
NO_MASK
European Court of Human Rights
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e76
001-159782_a11_em161
MISC
NO_MASK
M. v. Germany
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em162
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e55
001-159782_a11_em163
DATETIME
QUASI
4 May 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e93
001-159782_a11_em164
DATETIME
QUASI
2 June 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e94
001-159782_a11_em165
ORG
QUASI
Rosdorf centre
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e16
001-159782_a11_em166
ORG
QUASI
Rosdorf Prison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e54
001-159782_a11_em167
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Constitutional Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e55
001-159782_a11_em168
DATETIME
QUASI
4 May 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em169
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e95
001-159782_a11_em170
QUANTITY
NO_MASK
23
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e96
001-159782_a11_em171
DATETIME
QUASI
6 a.m. to 9.45 p.m.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-159782_a11_e97
001-159782_a11_em172
QUANTITY
QUASI
1,600
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em173
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em174
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e98
001-159782_a11_em175
ORG
NO_MASK
general prison service
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e83
001-159782_a11_em176
ORG
QUASI
Moringen Psychiatric Hospital
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em177
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e99
001-159782_a11_em178
DATETIME
QUASI
28 November 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e100
001-159782_a11_em179
DATETIME
QUASI
July 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e101
001-159782_a11_em180
DATETIME
QUASI
August 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e101
001-159782_a11_em181
DATETIME
QUASI
August 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e102
001-159782_a11_em182
DATETIME
QUASI
March 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e103
001-159782_a11_em183
DATETIME
QUASI
June 2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e104
001-159782_a11_em184
DATETIME
QUASI
February 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e101
001-159782_a11_em185
DATETIME
QUASI
August 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e12
001-159782_a11_em186
LOC
QUASI
Rosdorf
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e99
001-159782_a11_em187
DATETIME
QUASI
28 November 2014
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e57
001-159782_a11_em188
PERSON
NO_MASK
W.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e105
001-159782_a11_em189
DATETIME
QUASI
2013
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-159782_a11_e106
001-159782_a11_em190
DATETIME
QUASI
December 2014
Karl-Heinz Bergmann
DEU
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Karl-Heinz Bergmann