Workshop by Oleksandr Lysak

Taking on a case, I first turn my attention to the case materials. There is a well-known expression “client, agreement, let’s get started”, which is an equivalent of “lights, camera, action!” in our profession. But, while examining the case materials, I determine my own position in defence, and during a meeting with a prospective client, first of all, I present my vision of the proceeding with its strengths and weaknesses. Then I suggest the client not stick with me and turn to other criminal defence lawyers, talk to them, obtain their advice, verify the solution proposed by me, that is to say, to make a kind of validation of professional and personal compatibility. The purpose is to select, among various lawyers, someone with whom to entrust his or her life and destiny. In criminal proceedings, even the minimal publicity of a case creates a burden of responsibility for both a client and his/her lawyer. On the market, there is a tendency now for many private practitioners and top firms to compete with each other for clients, whereas I suggest to select. However, if we sign an agreement, then we go together all the way through. The main rule is never promise anything to your client. It is up to a court to decide a case.

___________________

Defence lawyers must always remember that their mission is to provide the protection of persons and they must do it professionally. When I am asked “How can you defence corrupt public officials?” “politically fringe figures?“ or anyone else, who I proudly call my client, I always answer by citing the lawyer's oath and rules of professional conduct. Should someone seek assistance from you, provide it if you can, but if you cannot, do not take the case. The most important thing is not to make the situation worse, because it involves reputation, authority, heavy workload, and above all, human health and life. Anyway, everyone seeking legal assistance, whoever he or she might be, needs protection. So take the case on and defend. Do not blame your legal colleagues. I have never blamed.

___________________ 

Indeed, for a defence lawyer, to get a client acquitted is the most desirable outcome of the case. It is the same as to get “excellent” at an exam. To obtain an acquittal, you will have to go through a lengthy process. And when you look at criminal defence lawyers, even a superficial analysis will show that there are just few cases ended with acquittal, if any at all. Even when it comes to extremely experienced lawyers. That is why for us, in any proceeding and for any lawyer, the ideal situation is to have cases resulted in acquittals. To prove a case and obtain an acquittal takes huge efforts; nevertheless, it is of paramount importance since it brings about fame, opportunities, new approaches to legal aid and increased prestige of Ukrainian defence lawyers.

___________________

When making information on a case available to the public or taking on a high-profile case, a lawyer must be self-confident. This is the main requirement in publicly available cases: to be self-confident in what you say and what you do. I personally keep track of public proceedings, because it is interesting to know how my colleagues act and how prosecutors behave. Sometimes you can find something new for yourself. I am always guided, first of all, by qualified petitions that I submit and try to be careful when giving interviews and comments about certain circumstances. Every man to his trade. A lawyer provides defence, a prosecutor is responsible for prosecuting and a court decides a case; there is no point in discussing specific persons. Though news reporters may ask any and all questions about public proceedings, I personally focus rather on the proceeding, careful hard work, preparation and examination of documents, than on public battles.

___________________

A lawyer cannot avoid becoming identified with a client, but it is not worth bothering about that. Ignore any thrusts. Inevitably the notion that “defending a hate figure means being an a hate figure too“ comes up, since news media coverage of some aspects of cases is not always accurate. Still, what is wrong with being a defender? What really matters is the outcome of a case. It is essential to exercise as much self-control as possible. No matter how hard it is to keep composure, when, for example, the court decided unfavourably, you have to brace up and realize that the decision is rendered and must be obeyed. Remember that there will be decisions of a court of cassation and a court of appeal; only when you achieve results in higher courts, you can make a name for yourself, thereafter you can reach higher heights by staying professional, calm and composed. Judges know all defence lawyers, so when you enter the proceeding, they know you, your qualification, expertise, whether you do your work professionally or not. When you have achieved results, you enter a courtroom with your head held high. When you have achieved no results, judges do not recollect you because they remember only those who produce results in their work.

___________________ 

I wish that young lawyers, who just start their careers, would love their profession, always strive for knowledge and feel a desire to win. Though you may start out slowly, even Heinrich Padva has lost his first case. There was a rape case, where the identity of the person remained unknown during eight years and then the person appeared before the lawyer. The criminal defendant was sentenced to the minimum prison term, that was the result of the lawyer's work, who handled the case without assistance. My first case, which was very complicated with grave consequences (the victim's death), was closed for absence of elements of a crime in the act. You can make a start with any, even simple, case: make preparations, build the defence, win the case and remember it all life long. That is what counts.

______________

I have an interest in fast proceedings, that is why I keep track of the case that began in June, and a jury will give its verdict as early as in August. In this case, 27 witnesses have testified during 10 days. The productivity is impressive! That is Manafort case. I would like to see the same speed in our work, so that neither a client nor a lawyer would have to wait for positive outcome in the proceeding for a long time. Without any protraction of proceedings, sabotage, efforts to influence the court, but with ensuring the efficiency that would be at least partially analogous to Manafort case.