• I.1 Do the police have powers to channel an offence aside without further involvement of the criminal justice system?
• I.2 Through what methods?
• I.3 Does the prosecution service have possibilities to regulate the influx of cases sent in by the police?
• I.4 Which possibilities exist to regulate the influx?
• I.5 Can the prosecution service exercise influence on the choice of the police to investigate, or not to investigate?
• I.6 What influence can the prosecution service apply?
• I.7 Can the prosecution service refuse to proceed with a case, after the case has been investigated and sent in by the police, on grounds other than the application of the expediency principle, or other than technical reasons?
• I.8 What are these grounds?
• I.9 Are discontinued cases registered as cases processed by the prosecution system?
• I.10 Can the public prosecutor be involved in the police investigation process from the moment it is started up?
• I.11 In which cases?
• I.12 Which special investigation methods?
• I.13 Which coercive measures?
• I.14 Does the prosecution service have the power to decide on the scope of the police investigation?
• I.15 Does the prosecution service have the power to give instructions to the police, which cases have to be further investigated and which cases have to be discontinued?
• I.16 What decisions may be taken by the prosecution service on a file sent in by the police?
• I.17 On what main grounds can non-prosecution take place?
• I.18 What are the main technical/legal reasons?
• I.19 What are the main diversionary measures?
• I.20 What are the main simplified procedures?
• I.21 What other decisions?
• I.22 Are the decisions referred to in question 16 taken by a public prosecutor himself?
• I.23 If the prosecutor himself does not take the decision, then who does?
• I.24 Who supervises a prosecutorial decision not taken by the prosecutor?
• I.25 For a decision referred to in question 16, does the prosecutor need consent from others?
• I.26 In case of non-prosecution due to the expediency principle, who needs to give his consent?
• I.27 In case of non-prosecution for technical and legal reasons, who needs to give his consent?
• I.28 In case of a diversionary measure, who needs to give his consent?
• I.29 Who gives his consent in case of a simplified procedure?
• I.30 Who decides on a charge in the indictment?
• I.31 Which judge and what procedure is applied?
• I.32 May the charge be changed while the case is pending in court?
• I.33 Under which circumstances?
• I.34 May the charge/indictment be withdrawn while the case is pending in court?
• I.35 Who has the right to withdraw the charge?
• I.36 Who needs to give his consent for the withdrawal of the charge?
• I.37 What happens with the case after the withdrawal of the charge?
• I.38 Has the formulation of the charge for (certain) crimes been standardised?
• I.39 Who standardises the formulation of the charge for (certain) crimes?
• I.40 May a court trial be expedited after an agreement (Verfahrensbeendende Absprachen/bargaining)?
• I.41 Which parties are as a rule involved in an agreement?
• I.42 What is the content of such an agreement as a rule?
• I.43 Who must consent to the agreement?
• I.44 Does the public prosecutor request or suggest which sentence the court should impose at the end of the court trial?
• I.45 Do instructions or guidelines exist on what sentence to request or suggest?
• I.46 Are these instructions made public?
• I.47 What is the source of these instructions (if possible URL-website)?
• I.48 Who issues these instructions?
• I.49 What is – overall – the content of these instructions?
• I.50 Are these instructions restricted to sentence requests for specific types of crimes?
• I.51 For what types?