After an emergency measure or an emergency temporary measure, who must put the interim measure application in front of a prosecutor, and what triggers that duty?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In practice material of this kind, we read the judicial police officer's own record of what was done or received, any notification from a metropolitan mayor, mayor, county head or district office head, and the emergency measure result report, because each of these shows which trigger the provision turns on.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading puts the duty on the judicial police officer in three situations: where that officer carried out emergency measures within a defined range of the Act's emergency-measure list, where the officer carried out an emergency temporary measure under the temporary-measure provision, or where the officer received notice from a metropolitan mayor, mayor, county head or district office head that emergency measures within that range had been carried out; in each case the officer must, without delay, seek the prosecutor's application for an interim measure.
Another reading marks the boundary of that reach: the notification route depends on the notice actually coming from one of the officials the provision names, and the trigger reaches only the part of the Act's emergency-measure list the provision specifies, so a measure elsewhere on that list, or notice from another body, does not by itself create the duty.
Your judgment
Where the file shows several measures at once, how is the ground for the officer's duty to be identified?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to widen or narrow the triggering measures or the officials whose notice counts, or if a court decision states how soon after the trigger the officer must act.