Update from November 19, 2025:
The Federal Government, in its cabinet meeting on Wednesday, November 19, 2025, decided on a Draft law on the introduction of electronic monitoring of residence and perpetrator intervention in the Protection Against Violence Act The Women's Shelter Coordination Association (FHK) has decided on the so-called draft bill from the end of August 2025, together with the Federal Association of Independent Welfare Organizations, a statement written.
Our criticism that electronic monitoring cannot be ordered against the will of the person affected was heard and accordingly incorporated into the current draft legislation. The order for electronic monitoring has also been linked to participation in an offender rehabilitation course and supplemented with so-called violence prevention counseling.
According to the draft law now available, visitation rights will be synchronized with measures in child protection cases.
This article was first published on September 17th. It deals with the topic of violence prevention and (high) risk management. from our specialist information this year.
Risk management happens before the fall
Given the demands placed on the state to provide protection from violence and prevent femicides, various buzzwords such as "ankle bracelets" and social skills training courses appear in professional and political debates. These individual elements are highlighted and touted as game-changers. However, they must be embedded in a risk management framework, as they cannot be used effectively in isolation and without a corresponding analysis.
Assessing the threat level is a prerequisite, not a consequence, of the various newly invoked instruments. The highly symbolic instrument of the electronic ankle monitor has been available since the end of August. Draft bill to introduce electronic monitoring of residence and perpetrator work in the Protection Against Violence Act.
Step by step – through Germany with an ankle bracelet?
As early as summer 2024, a debate erupted between the Federal Ministries of the Interior and Justice. Following a proposal by the then SPD-led Interior Ministry to introduce nationwide electronic monitoring (the legal term for "ankle bracelet"), the FDP-led Justice Ministry countered that this was a matter for police and public order law and therefore a matter for the individual states.
Im Coalition agreement of the current government[1] The aim is to create a "uniform federal legal basis in the Protection Against Violence Act for the court-ordered use of electronic ankle monitors." A review of the law shows that such a restrictive instrument is already possible in principle – either to prevent a potential offender from committing crimes or to prevent recidivism as a means of criminal supervision (§ 68b para. 1 sentence 1 no. 12 of the German Criminal Code).
So far, this has focused on perpetrators of extremist crimes or sex offenders. The police laws of eight German states already include this provision, for example in... Section 34c of the Police Act of North Rhine-Westphaliain Section 31a of the Hessian Security and Order Act and since spring 2025 in Section 201 c of the Schleswig-Holstein State Administrative Law[2]There are corresponding regulations for cases of domestic and sexual violence.
The Thuringian Police Duties Act is also to be updated. These are mostly time-limited measures (three to four months) which, given the high legal value of personal freedom, are subject to special review and judicial authorization by a local court.
Compliance with the restricted zones is monitored by the "Joint Electronic Monitoring Center of the Federal States" (GÜL) in Hesse. This center was established through a state treaty between Hesse, Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, and North Rhine-Westphalia, to which all other federal states have acceded. Since the first pilot project in 2000, approximately 2.300 electronic ankle monitors have been fitted in Germany, including about 200 in 2024 – primarily in cases of supervision following relevant criminal offenses.
This is ordered when a convicted offender requires further monitoring and support for rehabilitation after release from prison. The Federal Constitutional Court has set very high standards for the legality and constitutionality of such a measure, but has generally declared it to be constitutional. [4] However, no decision has been made regarding the preventive use of an ankle monitor according to the models now under consideration.
Spain as a role model
In January 2025, the first "electronic ankle monitor based on the Spanish model" was used in Saxony.5 In this case as well, the measure was ordered after a prison sentence had already been served. Legal policy assumes that current instruments for protection against violence are insufficient to prevent femicides. This is now to be addressed by amending the Protection Against Violence Act, which will allow for the wearing of an ankle monitor to be ordered under civil law.
The rationale lies in the substantive similarity to protective orders such as restraining orders and exclusion orders, compliance with which can be better monitored and violations more consistently sanctioned using an ankle bracelet. With the now very urgent proposals for the introduction of an ankle bracelet (coalition agreement) Announcements in the Federal Council[6] and decision of the Conference of Interior Ministers [7]) reference is regularly made to the successful model from Spain.
Its constitutional law (Ley Orgánica 1/2004) represents a comprehensive protection package against gender-based violence. Components include prevention, victim protection, consistent prosecution, and accompanying measures for those affected in the housing and labor markets.
The use of an electronic ankle bracelet for the perpetrator and the simultaneous equipping of the affected person with a GPS receiver (bilateral technology) takes place following a court decision by a court specializing in domestic violence.
The court's decision is based on feedback from the police and social workers, as well as an assessment of the individual circumstances of the person affected. The court also examines whether the perpetrator possesses weapons or should be incarcerated. [8]
A special web-based risk assessment system is used for gender-based violence (VioGén) is used. This comprehensively examines past and present incidents of violence using a national, supra-regional database. The familial, social, economic, and psychological situation of both the perpetrator and the victim is also taken into account. Based on this, the situation is classified into one of five risk levels.
Depending on the assessed risk level, the court orders specific measures. For women at low risk, protection might involve, for example, regular phone calls to inquire about their situation. This allows for an update of the risk assessment. In cases of high risk, the system might, for instance, establish patrols around their home or workplace.
At the highest level, electronic surveillance devices are ordered. A private service provider supplies the parties involved with the devices. COMETA, a multi-professional institution available 24/7, acts as an intermediary between the court and the technology provider.
It monitors all ankle monitor pairs, triggers an alarm for both the perpetrator and the victim of violence, and informs the nearest police station if there is no response. In addition to monitoring, it also maintains constant communication between the court, law enforcement agencies, and statistical data collection.
With this holistic approach, Spain has succeeded in significantly reducing the number of femicides (the proportion of those killed who had a restraining order fell from 18 percent in 2010 to 7 percent in 2015). [9].
Track record and transferability
However, Spanish women's support organizations are critical of the continued homicide of women. They point to faulty risk assessment as the cause, and the fact that only about 25 percent of those affected had prior contact with the police, thus even having the opportunity to receive appropriate attention and care.
Similar findings can be assumed for Germany as well. In anticipation of an expected study on femicides from the University of Tübingen, [10] It has already become clear that "only" 10 percent of the cases examined would have been suitable for the provision of an ankle monitor.
At the same time, approximately 40 percent of the women affected had not previously been brought to the attention of the state for protection through police interventions or applications under the Protection Against Violence Act. This means that many victims are not connected to the support system, or that the warning signs were either not clear or were not recognized.
The concern remains that a significant percentage of women affected by violence will continue to be at risk of being killed despite the introduction of electronic ankle monitors. This is true even though perpetrators made corresponding threats in a high proportion of cases. The statement "I'll kill you" must therefore be taken very seriously. The second most frequent threat of this kind was made to children. Therefore, other early warning systems are needed, or rather, these signals must be taken more seriously.
Protection against violence law – not the right place for an ankle monitor
If the mandatory ankle bracelet is enshrined in the Violence Protection Act, it could not reach the women most at risk. According to women's shelter statistics, [11] Only about 12 percent of women living in women's shelters apply for protection orders under the Protection Against Violence Act. Furthermore, the 41 percent of women who had experienced police intervention reported that, as a result of the police intervention, only eight percent of them received a restraining order.
In only two percent of cases were perpetrators taken into custody, and warnings were issued to potential offenders in nine percent of cases. Although state police laws provide for corresponding measures such as restraining orders, exclusion orders, or bans on entering certain areas—including, as mentioned, electronic monitoring—in cases of domestic violence, statistics show that only a small proportion of police action is directed at the perpetrators. Instead, it is more often the women affected by violence (20 percent) who are referred to women's shelters by the police.
Quality recommendations
Current women's shelter statistics
