On 7 July 2011, the Commission requested to inspect files from Hamburg public prosecution office from the most recent 20 pending investigations against officers of police station 11 chronologically up to 31 March 2011. The files reached the secretariat on 8 and 13 September 2011, respectively. The National Agency made the following statement on two cases on 11 October 2011 as an addition to its report: Recommendations of the Commission of the Länder Following a physical search in the detention area of police station 11, the reporting party was ordered to undress and to walk up and down several times in front of three police officers in the so-called “waddling gait”. The measure was said to serve to trace packets of narcotics located on the body or in orifices of the body. No drugs were found. A drug test was also negative. The detainee referred to the procedure as particularly undignified. The senses of shame and the dignity of the person concerned were said to have been considerably impaired by the actions of the police officers. It is irrelevant here that the person concerned carried out the action in question without contradiction. The person was subject to considerable mental pressure in this situation, and hence complied with the officers’ instructions. The Commission of the Länder requests a statement as to whether the police officers’ action was necessary, and if so why. The incident gives rise to a finding that police actions must always have in mind the dignity of the person concerned. Should a physical search be necessary, the action of trying to locate items located in orifices of the body is always to be carried out by a physician. During a temporary apprehension, the person who filed this charge received a blow to the face from a police officer, since she resisted the police measure, according to the information from the officer. The acting officer here relied on the application of the so-called Atemi technique said to cause a brief shock reaction, and hence prevent the person’s resistance. The notes of the public prosecution office 75 Reaction of the Authority for the Interior and Sport (Hamburg) The criminal proceedings against the police officers underlying the facts were said to have been discontinued by Hamburg public prosecution office in accordance with section 170 subs. 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO). In accordance with section 15 of the Act to Protect Public Security and Order (Gesetz zum Schutze der öffentlichen Sicherheit und Ordnung), the police were said to be permitted to search for certain items on human bodies, in their natural orifices and in their clothing. Also, it is said that the police were permitted to frisk clothed bodies, search naked bodies, as well as to look into the natural orifices and cavities of the body where the use of medical aids is unnecessary. The official assessment of the facts did not indicate that any official misconduct was to be investigated. Daily experience at police station 11 was said to have shown that, for instance, drugs are also hidden in all possible orifices of the body, such as between the buttocks. In individual cases, those concerned were asked to kneel down naked since this position would release any object that might be hidden there. [...] Over and above this, the “waddling gait” had not been ordered at police station 11. In order to facilitate the detention of a person resisting arrest, it could be expedient to use a certain stimulus to distract them from the ensuing police action (e.g. visual, acoustic and/or physical stimuli). Examples of a physical stimulus are said to be: a light blow with the back of the hand or a swipe with the hand over the face, or a slight kick against the shin. However, this