A good criminal defense lawyer is one who studies the file carefully, listens to the client before judging, explains legal risks openly and builds the defense on concrete evidence. Such a lawyer combines professional courage with independence, empathy with critical thinking, and experience with up-to-date legal knowledge. Quality shows not in promises of certain outcomes, but in the preparation undertaken to protect rights, in reasoned choices, and in careful follow-through on the work accepted.
Criminal proceedings can affect a person's liberty, family, work and place in society. For this reason, when assessing the qualities of a good criminal defense lawyer, character and working method must be considered together. Patience, honesty and composure, combined with file knowledge, evidence review and effective communication, raise the quality of legal assistance.
This article focuses in particular on the defense of suspects and accused persons. Care, independence, confidentiality and respect for human dignity also apply when a lawyer represents a victim or a person harmed by a crime; however, the status of the represented party and the procedural rights available differ. The examples below are not an opinion on any particular file or a promise of any result.
The role of the criminal lawyer: making the right to defense effective
The expressions "criminal lawyer" or "serious crimes lawyer" used in everyday language describe a field of work rather than a separate type of licence. Under Article 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a defense counsel (müdafi) is the lawyer who conducts the defense of a suspect or accused person, while a representative (vekil) is the lawyer who represents an intervening party, a person harmed by a crime or a person liable for property damage. It is not correct to call every criminal lawyer a defense counsel, regardless of whom they represent. [K1]
The purpose of the defense is not to make a person popular with the public or to turn a trial into a spectacle. The real matters are: understanding the accusation, examining the evidence, using rights in time, and ensuring that the person can be heard lawfully. An objection by a lawyer sometimes makes visible a single fact overlooked in the file; sometimes it prevents a right from remaining merely on paper.
Article 1 of the Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (Avukatlık Kanunu) regulates independent defense as one of the constituent elements of justice. However, it cannot be said that law and conscience belong to the defense alone: the judge must protect impartiality, and the public prosecutor also has a duty to gather evidence both in favor of and against the suspect. The independence of the defense requires that it fully perform its own function without devaluing other authorities. [K2; K1, Art. 160/2]
The standard shown by the ECtHR: being appointed is not enough
In the case of Artico v. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights emphasized that legal assistance must be practical and effective. The appointment of a lawyer does not by itself show that assistance was really provided. The judgment also does not mean that the State is automatically liable for every error of a lawyer; the circumstances of the case and whether the competent authorities were aware of the lack of assistance are important. [K3, §§33, 36–37]
The professional meaning of this approach is clear: preparing for a hearing is as valuable as attending it. The problem a signed petition solves in the file matters as much as the petition itself. The quality of a defense is assessed by the content of the legal assistance, not by the number of visible acts.
1. Be familiar with the file and keep your knowledge up to date
A good criminal lawyer does not reach for a ready-made defense template as soon as a crime is named. First they distinguish which act, by whom and on which evidence the accusation rests. Two files opened under the same offence name may differ entirely in the person's role, the timing of the act, the technical records and the legal characterization.
Prof. Dr. Erdener Yurtcan, in a 2008 speech reported by the Istanbul Bar Association, put this working discipline concisely:
"Above all, a lawyer must study the file carefully."
Erdener Yurtcan — Istanbul Bar Association, news report on a conference of December 16, 2008. [K4]
File review is more than reading documents one after another. The lawyer draws up the chronology of events, identifies conflicting accounts, and matches each allegation with the evidence said to support it. The lawyer calmly discusses the differences between the client's account and the records in the file. If there is a document they have not yet been able to access, they explain how this limits the assessment.
A legal instinct should start with a question to be verified
Experience can make it easier to notice a date inconsistency or an unusual account. However, instinct is not in itself evidence. The thought "there may be a problem with this transaction" should turn into a request for documents, a technical examination or a comparable legal research.
A competent lawyer also tests their own first view. When looking for decisions that support the defense theory, they also examine decisions in the opposite direction and their differences in facts. Rather than taking the result sentence from one decision and pasting it into a different file, they look at the date, the facts, the provision applied and the reasoning.
Keeping knowledge current is part of the same discipline. A current year in the title of an article does not prove that the time limits or procedural explanations inside it are up to date. The right question is: "On which source and which rule valid on what date is this information based?"
2. Examine evidence critically and technically
In a defense, evidence is not simply a pile of documents divided into those for and against. A record may be genuine, but the way it is interpreted may be wrong. A witness may be sincere but may confuse what they saw with what they later heard. An image may show that a person was present but may not explain the whole event or the person's intent.
A good lawyer does not confuse these distinctions. The source of the evidence, its integrity, the method of obtaining it and the matter it proves are separate questions. Article 217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure sets out the basic framework on lawful obtaining of evidence and its discussion at trial; Article 67(6) provides for obtaining a scientific opinion from an expert. [K1]
Looking beyond the screenshot in digital evidence
In a file containing messages, an audio recording or camera footage, relying only on the image on the screen may not be enough. The whole recording, date and time information, its association with a user, the transfer process and the method of technical examination may become important. Not every file requires the same tests; the technical questions are determined by the disputed fact.
For example, a message appearing to come from a particular account is not the same as proof that a specific person was using that account at that moment. This distinction does not automatically lead to an acquittal. It shows an accusation and an evidential question that must be investigated.
A lawyer is not expected to be an expert in every technical field. What is expected is that they recognize the limits of their own knowledge and, where necessary, put the right question to the right expert. Support from digital forensics, forensic medicine or financial examination is assessed according to the needs of the file.
The American Bar Association's standards on the defense function also address factual investigation, technical evidence knowledge and trial preparation as part of professional competence. These standards are not binding procedural provisions in Turkish law; they provide a useful framework for comparative study. [K5, 4-1.12, 4-4.1, 4-4.6]
3. Be courageous and independent, and justify your objections
A criminal lawyer's courage is not measured by the volume of their voice. True courage lies in pointing out illegality without fear of public reaction, defending an unpopular position with reasons, and not avoiding professional responsibility in a difficult file.
Article 18 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers reads:
"Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients' causes as a result of discharging their functions."
Translation from the original English text; not an official Turkish translation. [K6, principle 18]
Undertaking the defense of a person does not mean approving the conduct attributed to them. The value of the right to defense cannot be understood if it is used only for people whom society sympathizes with. Even for the person facing the gravest accusation, evidence, procedure and human dignity must be protected.
Independence is also important in the relationship with the client. A lawyer cannot accept an unlawful instruction, the alteration of evidence or the coaching of a witness. Nor can the lawyer abandon the duty to protect the client's lawful interests and to keep confidences. The defense cannot be regarded as an activity that forces a person to speak against themselves.
Courtesy does not reduce fighting strength
Emre Öktem, in the introduction to the Festschrift for Köksal Bayraktar, makes the following assessment:
"Prof. Bayraktar has always stood on the side of right against injustice, and defended 'right' with a combativeness that never gave up its courtesy."
Emre Öktem — "From the Editorial Board," Festschrift for Köksal Bayraktar, Vol. II, p. VII. [K7]
Öktem's assessment shows that courtesy and professional firmness can coexist. A lawyer may object without personal attacks, and may keep to the order of the court while not giving up a defense request. The basis of a firm stance is not to belittle the other party, but to explain the reasoning behind the request.
4. Be honest, reliable and bound by professional secrecy
Trust in a criminal file does not arise from warm communication alone. The client must know which information will be kept confidential, who may access the file, which matters have been undertaken, and how important developments will be reported.
Article 34 of the Attorneyship Law regulates professional care and honesty; Article 36 regulates the keeping of confidences; and Article 38 regulates situations requiring refusal of a matter. Conflicts of interest must be assessed when a representation relationship is established and throughout the process. [K2]
If several suspects initially say similar things, this does not show that their interests will remain the same throughout the process. If one suspect's defense is going to place responsibility on another, the suitability of the representation must be reconsidered. Being close to the client is not a reason to ignore these difficult questions.
Boundaries also apply in communication with family
A family member of a detained person or of someone experiencing intense anxiety may want information. However, being a relative does not by itself justify sharing all the information in the file. Information should be planned within the client's will, the representation relationship, the duty of confidentiality and any specific legal arrangements.
The fact that a family member pays the fee also does not mean that the defense decisions will be conducted according to their demands. The lawyer should clarify at the outset to whom legal assistance is provided and which information may be shared with whom.
Trying to gain trust by showing the names, confidential documents or files of other clients is also not a proper method. Experience can be assessed through the field of work, method and public professional information, without disclosing another person's privacy.
5. Show empathy while keeping legal distance when listening
A person preparing to give a statement may be afraid, ashamed or angry, or may struggle to describe events in order. A good lawyer first creates an understandable and safe meeting environment. They ask questions in a way that clarifies events rather than as an accusation. They check whether they have understood what was said.
Empathy does not mean accepting everything the client says without question. If an account does not match the documents, discussing this openly should not be regarded as conduct that damages the relationship of trust. The real care lies in identifying problems during preparation and helping the person understand them.
Türkiye Barolar Birliği's 2013 commemorative text attributes a short saying to Faruk Erem that is valuable for considering this distinction:
"Mercy is not justice." [K8]
Understanding a person's circumstances is important; however, the defense cannot rest on pity alone. Facts, responsibility, rights and legal safeguards must be considered together. While listening to a client, the lawyer also respects the human dignity of the victim. Hurtful generalizations and demeaning questions are not signs of a strong defense.
Children, language barriers and special communication needs
With children, persons with disabilities or those who do not speak Turkish well, the same interview method may not suit everyone. It matters that the person understands the explanation, can answer questions with their own will and can access the support they need. Specific safeguards on the appointment of a defense counsel and an interpreter are assessed according to concrete circumstances. [K1, Art. 150, 202]
The lawyer does not take on the role of psychologist or physician. Where trauma, health or communication difficulties require assessment, the lawyer respects the limits of the relevant expertise. The lawyer explains the legal process plainly and does not automatically treat the person's silence, anxiety or different communication style as a sign of unreliability.
6. Build defense strategy according to the circumstances of the file
Strategy is more than an impressive closing speech. It involves deciding which fact is to be discussed, which evidence is to be investigated, which legal objection takes priority and when each step should be taken.
A good lawyer does not offer the client a single optimistic scenario. They separate the strong points of the file, its weak points and what is not yet known. When a new document arrives, they may change their earlier assessment. Changing a view that is explained with reasons can be the result of careful work rather than carelessness.
Main defense and alternative legal assessment must be kept apart
A defense based on denying the act or the accusation, and a discussion of the legal consequences that could apply if the court takes a different view, are not the same thing. How alternative claims are formulated, their consistency with each other and their relationship to the client's account are carefully assessed. This area cannot be left to a set template petition.
Conciliation, summary proceedings or other special procedures are also not applicable to every offence and every person. Where such an option exists, the lawyer should explain its scope, conditions and likely consequences. A shorter process and a more favorable legal outcome for the person are not always the same thing.
Jacques Vergès, in an interview with the author, points out that a lawyer should keep in mind that the person in front of them is in a state of crisis. This observation shows the value of understanding a person's story in the defense. However, one lawyer's historical or political style of defense is not a method that can be applied to every file. [K9] The measure of strategy is not the lawyer's visibility, but the legal benefit to the client that can be explained in their file.
7. Follow the process, the time limits and the division of work regularly
A file does not progress only on hearing days. Preparation before a statement, the records that must be preserved, the communication of decisions, and the assessment of appeal routes also require attention. The thought "the hearing date has not yet come" does not in every case justify waiting.
The table below shows a working routine of a professional practice. It is not a timetable for any particular application. Time limits must be calculated separately according to the type of decision, the method of notification, the applicable regulation and the transitional provisions.
| Stage | What careful work looks like | What must be explained to the client |
|---|---|---|
| Initial assessment | The capacity, the accusation, the existing documents and the nearest procedural date are identified. | Which information is missing, and which step is needed first? |
| Investigation | The accessible file is examined; matters requiring investigation are identified. | What is known, and what is not yet known? |
| Protective measures | The decision and its reasoning are considered together with the person's individual circumstances. | What is the available route of challenge and the current legal risk? |
| Hearing | Evidence, questions and requests are prepared; proceedings are recorded. | What happened that day, and what is the next step? |
| After the decision | The reasoning, the appeal routes and the scope of representation are assessed. | Who will take on which step, and on what timetable? |
The power to put questions directly under Article 201 of the Code of Criminal Procedure also requires preparation. The aim is not to create a showy scene that pressures a witness, but to clarify information important to the dispute. [K1] A short, clear question can be more effective than a long sentence asking five different things at once.
Where there is teamwork, responsibility must be clear. A lawyer working alone is not automatically of higher quality than a firm team. What matters is the division of tasks, the transfer of the file, supervision, and a responsible person the client can reach. The lawyer who attends the hearing must be prepared for the file, regardless of the size of the firm.
8. Be open, accessible and realistic
A lawyer who inspires trust is not one who describes only the good possibilities. It is the lawyer who explains risks clearly and says when research is needed on a matter they do not know. The difference between a firm opinion formed without seeing the file and a preliminary assessment based on documents should be shown to the client.
Expressions such as "certain acquittal," "release for sure," or "I know the judge, I'll sort it out" do not replace a legal work plan. It should not be forgotten that the decision will be made by the competent authority, on the evidence and at the end of the proceedings. A lawyer's duty of care does not mean that they can achieve the desired result in every circumstance.
How to set up a sound communication arrangement
- Responsibility: Who will actually follow the file, and who will take part in important steps?
- Information: Through which channel will decisions and material developments be reported?
- Emergencies: How will contact be made in cases such as an arrest or an imminent step?
- Scope: To what extent are the first meeting, investigation, trial, appeal and enforcement work undertaken?
- Fees and costs: Which payment relates to which work, and how will additional expenses be handled?
Accessibility does not mean answering every message immediately at any hour. A realistic communication arrangement ensures that important developments are not missed and that the person is not left in uncertainty. The lawyer keeping their word is more meaningful than a claim of accessibility.
9. Use technology, but do not delegate your judgment to it
Digital file tools, text search or AI-supported applications can help organize large numbers of documents and identify research questions. However, a case number, quotation or summary produced by a system should not be transferred into a defense without verification.
The initial questions for careful use are: which data is being entered into the system? Who has access to this data? Does the document on which the output relies actually exist? Has an exception in the file been lost during summarization? Can the lawyer themselves defend the reasoning of the explanation prepared?
Uploading a client's documents to an application cannot be assessed only as a matter of technical convenience. Professional secrecy, data protection obligations and the terms of the service used must be considered together. Using technology well means being able to recognize a wrong output, not merely producing more output.
This competence is linked to continuous learning. Using a new tool or accessing many legal texts does not replace the ability to interpret those texts correctly. The roles of the tool that drafts a document and of the lawyer who bears legal responsibility are different.
10. Keep human dignity and social responsibility in view
Criminal practice is not an activity confined to the file of a single person. The way the right to defense is exercised also affects the presumption of innocence, trust in the judiciary and the language of public debate. At the same time, social responsibility does not justify turning a client's file into a personal agenda without regard for the client's will and interests.
In his 1924 defense in the case of Leopold and Loeb, aimed at avoiding a death sentence, Clarence Darrow said:
"I am pleading for the future; I am pleading for a time when hatred and cruelty will not control the hearts of men."
Translation from the original English text; Clarence Darrow, 1924, paragraph 496. [K10]
This statement is not a procedural rule to be applied to a current file in Türkiye. In its historical context it was an appeal directed at the relationship between punishment and humanity. The professional lesson that can be drawn today is to avoid language that reduces a person's legal position to the act attributed to them.
Protecting the human dignity of the defendant does not require belittling the suffering of the victim. Protecting the rights of the victim does not justify treating the defendant's right to defense as unnecessary. Fair trial requires a legal culture in which these rights are not presented as demands that cancel each other out.
Professional lessons from Turkish and foreign criminal lawyers
The names in the history of the defense illustrate different aspects of good advocacy. The persons discussed here did not all work in the same legal system, in the same period or with the same method. For this reason, rather than adopting one person's style in full, it is more useful to look at what a verifiable saying, work or practice illuminates about a professional question.
| Jurist | Example used in this article | Lesson for present-day work |
|---|---|---|
| Faruk Erem — Türkiye | His approach to the relationship between the person, law and justice. [K8] | Seeing understanding the person and legal assessment as complementary responsibilities. |
| Uğur Alacakaptan — Türkiye | A career combining criminal law scholarship, legal practice and professional training. [K16; K17] | Turning theoretical knowledge into file questions and continuing to learn. |
| Halit Çelenk — Türkiye | Defenses conducted in difficult periods and work done to give access to legal information. [K18] | Standing by the client through preparation, sharing information and responsibility. |
| Erdener Yurtcan — Türkiye | The emphasis on file preparation in a conference on criminal defense. [K4] | Testing an opinion against documents and clearly informing the client. |
| Köksal Bayraktar — Türkiye | The combination of courtesy and combativeness described by Emre Öktem. [K7] | Building a firm objection in a respectful and reasoned language. |
| Turgut Kazan — Türkiye | Defense services and professional training structures developed during his presidency. [K13] | Supporting professional quality with order, training and institutional continuity. |
| Fikret İlkiz — Türkiye | His statement on the relationship between freedom of expression and other fundamental rights. [K14] | Assessing a criminal file together with the relevant fundamental rights guarantees. |
| Orhan Adli Apaydın — Türkiye | Professional work for the independence of the defense and the right to a fair trial. [K24] | Protecting the right to defense as a legal guarantee independent of public pressure. |
| Duygun Yarsuvat — Türkiye | Academic work in criminal law, criminology and fundamental rights alongside legal practice. [K25] | Examining an accusation together with the liberties involved in the event and scientific knowledge. |
| Clarence Darrow — USA | The 1924 defense in the Leopold and Loeb case. [K10] | Considering human dignity and social effects when discussing punishment. |
| Jacques Vergès — France | The need, emphasized in his interview, to understand a client in crisis. [K9] | Building strategy by understanding the person's situation and according to the file. |
| Bryan Stevenson — USA | Technical evidence and long-term follow-up in the file of Anthony Ray Hinton. [K11] | Genuinely scrutinizing expert opinion; sustaining research and follow-up. |
| Gisèle Halimi — France | The relationship between defense and the client's will in the 1972 Bobigny trial. [K12] | Combining courage with open communication and the person's participation in the defense. |
The common lesson from these examples is that professional quality can appear through different ways of working. What matters is not imitating the reputation of a name, but being able to build preparation and responsibility in one's own file.
Faruk Erem: not seeing a person only as the act attributed to them
Faruk Erem's work Bir Ceza Avukatının Anıları (Memoirs of a Criminal Lawyer) is remembered, in the commemorative texts of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations, alongside his humane approach to criminal law. In the Union's 2011 statement, a saying attributed to Erem appears in the following form:
"Scrape the criminal; a human being will emerge from beneath."
Attributed to Faruk Erem; Union of Turkish Bar Associations, commemorative news of October 16, 2011. [K15]
This saying calls for seeing a person's life, circumstances and humanity. However, the historical term "criminal" used here does not justify calling a suspect or accused person who has not been found guilty by that name. Understanding a person also requires using language consistent with the presumption of innocence.
A study of Erem by Zeki Hafızoğulları and Sezin Duygu Tuncer also shows the procedural side of this humane approach: in Erem's thinking, conscientious conviction cannot be separated from evidence; statements obtained by methods that destroy a person's free will raise serious problems for the defense. [K26, pp. 15–16] This historical body of thought reminds us of the responsibility to question both the content of the evidence and the way it was obtained in a current file.
This approach shows in the lawyer's manner of interviewing: while listening to the events, attention is paid not only to the accusation, but also to the person's ability to explain and their need for communication. Empathy does not replace evidence; it strengthens the responsibility to take care of both the evidence and the person.
Uğur Alacakaptan: combining academic depth with legal practice
The Istanbul Bar Association commemorates Uğur Alacakaptan as a lawyer and professor of criminal law, and also conveys his influence on professional training through the internship experience of a former bar president. Istanbul Bilgi University, in the history of its law faculty, records Alacakaptan's role as founding dean. [K16; K17]
Considering these two aspects together illustrates why a good criminal lawyer must keep learning. Academic knowledge should help resolve the legal meaning of the act in a file; practical experience should test theoretical knowledge against current questions. The professional lesson drawn from this is that a title alone does not guarantee quality; what matters is that knowledge becomes reasoned defense work.
Hafızoğulları and Tuncer particularly examine, in Alacakaptan's scholarly work, the importance he gave to the principle of legality in crimes and punishments. [K26, p. 19] For the defense, legality requires concrete questions: what act is attributed to the person? Which element of the legal definition is it linked to? What evidence supports the alleged element? Such work opens the way to a defense that does not stop at repeating the name of the offence, but discusses the legal characterization with reasons.
Halit Çelenk: maintaining the responsibility of defense in difficult conditions
The life story in Halit Çelenk's archive describes the defenses he undertook in the periods of 12 March and 12 September, his role in the case of Deniz Gezmiş and his companions, and his work providing legal information to people who had difficulty reaching a lawyer. The preparation of a brochure on the right to defense during a preliminary investigation is one concrete example of an approach that did not confine the defense to the courtroom. [K18]
The professional lesson from this experience is that courage in a difficult file must be considered together with responsibility for preparation and follow-up. Public interest or the difficult circumstances of the proceedings do not reduce the need to study documents and inform the client. Explaining legal knowledge in an accessible way also supports a person's ability to exercise their rights.
Çelenk's political views and historical struggles should be assessed in their own context. Drawing on his professional examples does not mean tying good advocacy to a particular political view. Commitment to the right to defense requires taking the legal safeguards of people with different views seriously too.
Bryan Stevenson: technical evidence, expert support and persistent follow-up
According to the case account of the Equal Justice Initiative, Bryan Stevenson and his colleagues reopened the firearms examination in the defense of Anthony Ray Hinton. The findings of the experts they consulted did not confirm the match claimed between the bullets linked to the crime and a firearm belonging to Hinton's mother. After a long judicial process the charges were dropped; Hinton was released on April 3, 2015. [K11]
What is notable in this example is not only that the outcome changed. The presence of a technical report in a file is different from that report having been reliably tested. The lawyer's recognition of the question requiring expertise, provision of appropriate support and proper pursuit of the issue may be decisive.
This does not mean that every conviction will change on review. Nor can the procedure in the American case be transferred directly into Turkish law. The working principle drawn from the example is to investigate the basis and method of a report, rather than stopping at its title or its concluding sentence.
Gisèle Halimi: courage together with openness and the client's will
The French Ministry of Justice's historical account treats Gisèle Halimi's defense in the 1972 Bobigny trial together with her relationship with her clients. It specifically notes that, in transforming the case concerning abortion, then a crime, into a broader debate on rights, her clients' consent was obtained. [K12]
The Turkish translation of the saying the Ministry attributes to Halimi is as follows:
"I will defend you. But it will be hard. You will need courage and determination..."
Attributed to Gisèle Halimi, French Ministry of Justice — "Le procès de Bobigny." Translated from French. [K12]
This approach shows the value of not hiding difficulties while giving courage to the client. A lawyer's sensitivity to a public issue must not overshadow the will of the person they represent. A strong defense is one that informs the person and enables them to take part in the process, rather than one that takes ownership of their life in their place.
Bobigny is a historical example of French law in a particular period. What rule applies to the same question in Türkiye is assessed separately, on current Turkish legislation and the concrete facts.
Turgut Kazan and Fikret İlkiz: the institutional and rights-based side of the defense
The history of the Istanbul Bar Association records that during Turgut Kazan's presidency the CMUK Service was established in 1992 and the Internship Training Centre in 1994. [K13] These institutional efforts show that professional quality cannot be explained solely by one person's ability in the courtroom. Access to legal assistance, the training of new lawyers and regular working structures also affect the strength of the defense.
Fikret İlkiz's 2019 speech, as reported by the Istanbul Bar Association, draws attention to the close relationship between freedom of expression and freedoms of assembly and association. [K14] The practical value of this approach lies in not assessing the accused act only by the name of the penal provision. Where the file is relevant, guarantees of expression, press, assembly or association are also investigated. That an act is connected with these rights does not mean that no offence can arise in any case; it makes visible the assessment of rights that the concrete event requires.
Orhan Adli Apaydın: seeing the independence of the defense as professional responsibility
Orhan Adli Apaydın, who served as president of the Istanbul Bar Association from 1976 to 1983, appears in the institutional memory of the Bar through his work on the independence of the defense and the right to a fair trial. [K24] This professional legacy suggests that a criminal lawyer should care not only about voicing the client's request, but also about the request being heard freely and in accordance with procedure.
In today's file, the equivalent of this is effective provision of legal assistance, reasoning of defense requests and the protection of professional independence. A public reaction to a person may explain why that person needs a defense; it does not remove the right to defense.
Duygun Yarsuvat: thinking about criminal law together with liberties
Duygun Yarsuvat's academic works include Toplantı ve Gösteri Yürüyüşleri Hürriyeti ve İlgili Ceza Hükümleri (Freedom of Assembly and Demonstration Marches and the Related Penal Provisions), Trafik Suçları Kriminolojisi (Criminology of Traffic Offences) and Çalışma Ceza Hukuku (Labour Criminal Law). The biography of Galatasaray University records these scholarly works alongside his legal practice. [K25]
The professional lesson from this range of subjects is that a criminal file should not be closed by reference to a single legal article. Depending on the nature of the event, fundamental rights, employment relationships or technical data may also need to be examined. The lawyer does not act as an expert in every field; they recognize which question requires further research or another expertise. Scholarly curiosity, combined with professional care that knows its limits, strengthens the defense.
The common professional standard that emerges from these different careers is this: good defense requires, alongside knowledge and character, preparation, institutional awareness and an accountable working method.
Foundations of criminal law thought: Beccaria, Dönmezer, Erman, Kunter and Özek
To understand good criminal advocacy, one must also look at criminal law thought alongside defense experience. While learning what the law says, a lawyer also questions why the power to punish is limited and what need procedural safeguards answer. The works below offer different starting points for reflection on the purpose of sanctions, scientific method, procedure and fundamental rights.
Cesare Beccaria: proportionality, humanity and the prevention of crime
The Italian thinker Cesare Beccaria, in Dei delitti e delle pene (On Crimes and Punishments), discusses the relationship between crimes and punishments, torture and the prevention of crime in separate chapters. In the sixth chapter he addresses proportionality; in the sixteenth he criticizes the transformation of the capacity to endure pain into a measure determining guilt. The first sentence of chapter forty-one reads: [K19]
"è meglio prevenire i delitti che punirgli."
Turkish translation: "It is better to prevent crimes than to punish them."
Cesare Beccaria — Dei delitti e delle pene, chapter XLI. Translated for this article from the Italian text. [K19]
Beccaria's ideas remind us that good advocacy is not confined to calculating the length of a sentence. The defense should also question the justification for the sanction, the reliability of the evidence and the effect of the method used on the human being. Legal competence requires taking seriously the limits of the State's power to punish. Beccaria is treated here not as a representative of a courtroom style, but as one of the intellectual sources of criminal law.
Sulhi Dönmezer and Sahir Erman: linking scientific foundations with practice
Sulhi Dönmezer and Sahir Erman's Nazarî ve Tatbikî Ceza Hukuku (Theoretical and Applied Criminal Law) is a reference work that treats the doctrine of criminal law together with practical problems. Later editions of the work have been continued with the contributions of other jurists. [K20]
Görkem Kayacık, who reviewed Dönmezer's Kriminoloji (Criminology), explains his approach of not reducing the criminal phenomenon to a single cause and his research method drawing on data from different sciences. The review addresses the relationship with psychology, psychiatry and sociology, as well as the limits of the research methods used. [K21, pp. 633–635]
The meaning of this scientific approach for advocacy is not to confuse the legal question in the file with the factual question. Discussing the social causes of a behaviour does not prove that the person committed the act attributed to them. Likewise, a statistic or a general pattern of behaviour does not replace individualized evidence about a specific person. Good defense requires both using concepts correctly and testing what conclusion the information can support.
Nurullah Kunter: strengthening the defense with procedural knowledge
Nurullah Kunter's Muhakeme Hukuku Dalı Olarak Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku (Criminal Procedure Law as a Branch of Procedural Law) is among the basic reading sources for studying criminal procedure. [K22] A lawyer must complete their knowledge of substantive criminal law with knowledge of procedure: it is as important to know at what stage, before which authority and by what procedure an objection is to be raised as it is to explain its merits. Correct legal reasoning can be effective in a file when it is raised in time and by the proper procedure.
Çetin Özek: reading the criminal file together with fundamental rights
Çetin Özek's Türk Basın Hukuku (Turkish Press Law) and Basın Özgürlüğünden Bilgilenme Hakkına (From Freedom of the Press to the Right to Information) may be consulted to deepen the study of press and expression. [K23] In an investigation conducted because of a publication or a statement, the lawyer must examine not only the criminal norm but also the relevant fundamental rights guarantees. The context of the statement, its contribution to public debate and the justification of the interference may be important depending on the circumstances of the file. Historical works broaden the intellectual background; the resolution of a concrete event must be built together with the legislation in force and the relevant decisions.
What to consider when choosing a criminal lawyer
A lawyer's professional quality cannot be measured with certainty in a single meeting. Internet visibility, the size of the office, the level of fees or the number of years in practice are not sufficient on their own either. A more meaningful assessment is made through concrete questions about working method.
| Quality | What it may look like in a meeting or during the process |
|---|---|
| File knowledge | Asks for documents; separates the accusation from the points that remain unclear. |
| Critical thinking | Reassesses even their own first view in light of the evidence. |
| Empathy | Listens without interrupting and explains an unclear matter in plain language. |
| Honesty | Discusses risks together with strengths. |
| Independence | Sets a clear limit on any unlawful request. |
| Order | Identifies the person responsible, the next step and the method of follow-up. |
| Confidentiality | Limits the sharing of information to what is needed and authorized. |
| Technical competence | Explains why expert support is needed when required. |
Eight questions you may ask a criminal lawyer at a first meeting
- Which documents do you need in order to assess the accusation against me?
- What do we know and what do we not yet know at this stage of the file?
- Is there a step that is coming up soon or must not be delayed?
- How will we identify the evidence that needs to be investigated or preserved?
- How will I communicate with you and with the other people who will follow the file?
- Which stages does the representation cover, and which tasks will be assessed separately?
- How will we set out the fee, expenses and reporting arrangement in writing?
- What new information could change the assessment you make today?
It is helpful to have any summons, record of statement, indictment, decision, service documents and a short chronology of events available for the meeting. Not yet having all the documents is not in itself a reason to postpone a legal consultation where a recent step is involved. A lawyer's identity and bar registration can be verified through the official records of the relevant bar association or the Union of Turkish Bar Associations.
Example: how good defense preparation approaches a camera recording
Hypothetical event: A person is accused on the basis of a short camera recording said to show them at the scene. The person says the footage does not show the period before the event.
In careful preparation, the first step is not to say immediately "this recording is useless" or "this footage will lead to certain conviction." The point being discussed is identified: is it the identity of the person in the footage, the meaning of the movement, the start of the event, or the time of the recording?
Next, the whole recording, the manner in which it was obtained, its custody and the need for technical examination are considered. The time and content match with other evidence is investigated. Whether the necessary records should be preserved or obtained through the competent authorities is assessed. The technical finding is kept separate from the lawyer's legal interpretation.
At the end of this work, the initial defense view may be strengthened, weakened or changed. For example, the absence of part of the footage does not mean that it can never be legally used; it may, however, make it necessary to investigate its context. Professional quality shows not in claiming to know the right outcome from the start, but in progressing towards it by asking the right questions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a good criminal lawyer guarantee an acquittal or release?
No. The lawyer assesses the file, explains the legal options and carries out the work they have accepted with care. The outcome depends on the evidence, the applicable law and the decision of the competent authority. A claim of success and a reasoned work plan must be kept apart.
Is a criminal lawyer needed only after a case is opened?
No. Preparation before a statement, file review and protective measures make the investigation stage important too. The right to benefit from the assistance of a defense counsel is not limited to the trial stage. [K1, Art. 149]
Should a lawyer believe the client or question them?
The lawyer should listen to the client without judging and ask questions to understand what was said and compare it with the file. A relationship of trust does not prevent discussion of a contradiction that makes legal assessment difficult.
Is a lawyer who speaks very harshly more effective?
Tone of voice alone is not a measure of competence. A reasoned objection, the right question, prepared participation in the hearing and clear explanation are more meaningful indicators. Courtesy and firmness can coexist.
Is it better to choose a large firm or a lawyer working alone?
There is no single right answer. Who will follow the file, that person's preparation, the clarity of the division of work and the continuity of communication should be assessed. The size of the firm or number of persons does not by itself prove quality.
What can a person who cannot afford a lawyer do?
The request for appointment of a defense counsel under the Code of Criminal Procedure and the conditions of mandatory defense are assessed. A suspect or accused person may inform the competent authority that they are unable to choose a defense counsel and forward their request to it. In some cases an appointment is made without the need for a request. [K1, Art. 150]
Does a lawyer who uses artificial intelligence become a better lawyer?
Using a tool alone is not an indicator of competence. What matters is the protection of confidentiality, verification of sources, supervision of whether the output fits the file, and the lawyer's assumption of legal responsibility.
Conclusion: good criminal advocacy is knowledge and character working together
A good criminal lawyer, while looking at the details of the file, does not lose sight of the person in front of them. They understand the client's anxiety; they do not pretend to know what they do not know. They explain legal possibilities, do not hide risks, follow changing circumstances and can explain the reasons for their choices.
In this profession, courage is completed by preparation, empathy by critical thinking, and experience by openness to learning. The protection of the right to defense depends sometimes on a long legal inquiry, sometimes on a single question asked at the right moment, and sometimes on listening carefully at a moment when everyone else is in a hurry.
The trust a good criminal lawyer earns rests not on promising an outcome in advance, but on taking the person seriously, working on the file with care and standing behind the responsibility they have undertaken.
Sources and legal bases
K1. Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 (5271 sayılı Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu) — Arts. 2, 67/6, 149–150, 160/2, 201–202 and 217. Legislation Information System.
K2. Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (1136 sayılı Avukatlık Kanunu) — Arts. 1, 34, 36, 38 and 55. Legislation Information System.
K3. ECtHR, Artico v. Italy — May 13, 1980, application no. 6694/74, §§33, 36–37. HUDOC.
K4. Istanbul Bar Association — Erdener Yurtcan: A Criminal Lawyer Fights for Freedom — December 16, 2008. Erdener Yurtcan's conference of December 15, 2008.
K5. American Bar Association — Criminal Justice Standards, Defense Function — Criminal Justice Standards for the Defense Function, 4th edition, 2017, standards 4-1.12, 4-4.1 and 4-4.6.
K6. United Nations — Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers — Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, 1990, principle 18. University of Minnesota Human Rights Library.
K7. Emre Öktem — From the Editorial Board, Festschrift for Köksal Bayraktar, Vol. II — Galatasaray University Faculty of Law Review, 2010/1, Festschrift for Köksal Bayraktar, Vol. II, October 2011, pp. VII–VIII.
K8. Union of Turkish Bar Associations — Av. Prof. Dr. Faruk Erem at 100 — Union of Turkish Bar Associations, 2013.
K9. M. G. Zimeta — A good trial is a work of art — Prospect, August 29, 2013. Interview with Jacques Vergès.
K10. Clarence Darrow — Plea for Leopold and Loeb — August 22, 23 and 25, 1924, §496. Voices of Democracy, University of Maryland.
K11. Equal Justice Initiative — Anthony Ray Hinton — Equal Justice Initiative, "Anthony Ray Hinton," case archive.
K12. French Ministry of Justice — Le procès de Bobigny — French Ministry of Justice, July 28, 2020; updated July 10, 2024.
K13. Istanbul Bar Association — History — Istanbul Bar Association, January 15, 2023.
K14. Istanbul Bar Association — Instrumentalization of the Judiciary — Istanbul Bar Association, panel of June 15, 2019; speech by Fikret İlkiz.
K15. Union of Turkish Bar Associations — We Respectfully Commemorated Our Founding President Faruk Erem — Union of Turkish Bar Associations, October 16, 2011.
K16. Istanbul Bar Association — We Lost Av. Prof. Dr. Uğur Alacakaptan — Istanbul Bar Association, January 22, 2022.
K17. Istanbul Bilgi University Faculty of Law — History — Istanbul Bilgi University Faculty of Law, institutional history.
K18. Halit Çelenk Archive — Life Story of Halit Çelenk — Halit Çelenk Archive, biography.
K19. Cesare Beccaria — Dei delitti e delle pene — Dei delitti e delle pene, first published 1764, chapters VI, XVI and XLI. Imperia Bar Association Italian text archive.
K20. Der Publishing — Nazarî ve Tatbikî Ceza Hukuku — Sulhi Dönmezer and Sahir Erman, Nazarî ve Tatbikî Ceza Hukuku. Publisher's imprint and introduction for the 2016 edition.
K21. Kayacık, Görkem — Turkey's First Criminology Book: An Examination of Sulhi Dönmezer's Criminology — Adalet Dergisi, 2021/1, issue 66, pp. 627–638; in particular pp. 633–635.
K22. TOBB ETÜ — Criminal Procedure Law I, course materials — TOBB University of Economics and Technology, HUK403 Criminal Procedure Law I course materials: Nurullah Kunter, Muhakeme Hukuku Dalı Olarak Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku.
K23. Istanbul University — Mass Communication and Internet Law, course materials&id=707266) — Istanbul University, Mass Communication and Internet Law course materials: Çetin Özek, Türk Basın Hukuku, 1978; Basın Özgürlüğünden Bilgilenme Hakkına, 1999.
K24. Istanbul Bar Association — The Dignified Voice of the Defense: Orhan Adli Apaydın — March 2, 2026.
K25. Galatasaray University — Prof. Dr. Duygun Yarsuvat (2004–2008) — University history, rector biography.
K26. Hafızoğulları, Zeki and Tuncer, Sezin Duygu — The Three Great Criminal Lawyers of the Ankara Law School: Baha Kantar, Faruk Erem, Uğur Alacakaptan — Ankara Bar Review, Vol. 81, Republic 100th Anniversary Special Issue, 2023, pp. 9–21; in particular pp. 15–16 and 19.
This article is for general legal information. A concrete matter is assessed together with its documents and the provisions to be applied.