“If we receive a photo, we are obliged to share it internally first,” said a police spokesman. “Then we’ll see if we can come to a recognition.” If officers do not recognize the person in the photo, the Public Prosecution Service (OM) will then assess whether the police may also show the photo to others.
“We then look at proportionality and subsidiarity,” explains a Public Prosecution Service spokesperson. Simply put: is the offense serious enough and have sufficient other means been used to achieve recognition? That will not be the case soon enough with most bicycle thefts, say both the police and the Public Prosecution Service. “You also have to be able to prove that the seller knew that the bicycle was stolen,” says the police spokesperson.
The Public Prosecution Service cannot give a direct answer to the question whether Herman may share a photo of the seller himself. “It’s a gray area,” the spokesperson said. “You may make an appeal, but libel and slander are again not allowed.” When something is libel or slander, it is not easy to tell in advance. “We can only test that afterwards.”
The seller can therefore file a report if the photo is published, after which the Public Prosecution Service investigates whether the posted message falls under libel or defamation. The Public Prosecution Service emphasizes that they only deal with criminal law. “But you also have the civil law side. For example, you can also infringe someone’s portrait right.”