Miranda warning

The right to silence, the right of a witness to refuse to certain questions the information. As AVR abbreviated misleading it is often confused with the right to remain silent, which is the right of a suspect. The right to silence is to the witnesses during the criminal proceedings, ie already with the investigation when being interviewed by police, prosecutor or investigating judge. About the right to withhold information, the witness shall be instructed before.

Normalizes the right to withhold information in Germany is in § 55 Code of Criminal Procedure ( CCP).

The right to withhold information extends to those interrogation questions, bring the witnesses or any of its members in the event of truthful answer in the risk of prosecution for an offense or a misdemeanor. However, the right to silence is that no sub-case of evidentiary law. The witness must not be extended unduly on the right to withhold information. He has to make the reference in § 56 Code of Criminal Procedure at the discretion of the court credible, possibly by oath. In general, the reference leads to the right to silence in criminal proceedings to a file note of the prosecutor's office, which then may investigate in the direction of the witness or his family members are introduced. If the right to withhold information wrongly exercised, it can under restrictive aspects according to § 70 paragraph 2 Code of Criminal Procedure custody ( obsolete: Beugehaft ) are arranged. This, however, only if the reference to the right to silence happens evident wrongly.

Special

The right to silence is the outflow of the principle that no one even needs to strain ( nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare ). Although this principle is of fundamental rights as equal rights constitutional status, yet the right to withhold information - which only applies to certain questions - weaker than the evidentiary privilege, which covers the entire statement.

• The right to withhold information, for example, enjoys in a separate process, even the final convict. This can avail any statements to action to make in order not to get a sharper or more conviction.

• According to the Federal Court the obligation to inform is not offered with any suspicion. Against this view is given, the rule of law could be softened since then the policy provision in § 55 paragraph 2 Code of Criminal Procedure could be interpreted to be a directory provision has to offer. If notice requirement of § 55 paragraph 2 Code of Criminal Procedure injured, so this is according to the settled case-law believes no reason for revision (so-called legal system theory).

• Regardless of the exercise of the right to silence, however, the witness may be sworn. The oath then extends to the remaining statements.

In Austria, the special feature is that the Constitution, who has directed at a specific time a motor vehicle the powers of certain authorities to request information about it in the context of driver identification, gives precedence before refusing to provide information rights.