Hamburg defence lawyer Gerhard Strate is — and I say this without hesitation — one of the most remarkable advocates of his generation. The case in which he defended Gustl Mollath is part of the recent history of German criminal procedure. Anyone who wants to understand what it means to bring down a wall of medical opinions, judicial routines and political inertia need only reread his briefs from that time.
Recently, however, I noticed a quotation attributed to him that made me pause. In a magazine interview, asked about the solidarity between defence lawyers, Strate is reported to have said that he did not think much of it; he worked for his clients, not for his colleagues. That is the blunt version; the full answer was of course more nuanced. Still, the message sticks: the profession's code of conduct for "collegiality" is secondary.
That is a statement I have thought about a great deal in the years since. And I would now disagree, with respect.
Collegiality among defence lawyers is not an old boys' network. It is not a backroom deal in which we agree to go easy on each other. On the contrary, anyone who experiences a robust defence style first-hand knows that we cross-examine each other's witnesses, dismantle each other's arguments and expose each other's mistakes without hesitation. That is our job.
But collegiality begins where the theatre of the courtroom ends. It begins when a colleague, after a gruelling day of trial, asks for a telephone call, a second pair of eyes on a draft, a sanity check on a tactical choice. It begins when one confers in the corridor with a colleague one has beaten in the hearing, because tomorrow they will be on the same side. It begins when one does not cheer publicly the misfortune of another — because an hour later, it might be us.
Strate is right about one thing: our loyalty goes to the client. Without that, we lose our authorisation. But to suggest that loyalty to the client and respect for colleagues are mutually exclusive strikes me as a false choice. A defence system that stands on the pillars of aggression and isolation alone will break its own lawyers before it breaks any prosecutor.
So, with all due respect: we can be uncompromising advocates and civilised colleagues at the same time. We have to be, actually. Because the alternative — defenders who fight everyone, colleagues included — looks a lot like a profession where being alone has become the rule. And loneliness is not a sharper weapon. It is simply a heavier one.
I will not be less committed to my clients for saying this. But I wanted to say it. Collegiality and competence need not cancel each other out. Strate of all people, who has changed so much with his fiercely independent work, must know that. His quotation, I suspect, has been read too sharply — and quoted too often.
It was meant, I am sure, as a reminder. It is always a client's case, never a colleagues' club. Agreed. But let us not forget that tomorrow we will need each other again.