Can I record the police and can they force me to erase the images I have recorded of them?
October 6, 2025
Ayuso’s boyfriend is not a confessed offender: The subtle distinction between plea bargaining and admission of guilt
November 11, 2025
In the exercise of the right of defense, the attorney-client relationship rests on three essential pillars: trust, loyalty and communication. Without them, no legal strategy can be successfully sustained. And although it is often thought that once the defense is initiated, this relationship is immovable, the reality is quite different: a lawyer can waive the defense and a client can dispense with his lawyer. Both decisions are legitimate, but must be made carefully and in accordance with the law.
1. A right of both parties, but with guarantees
Spanish procedural law allows both the attorney's waiver and the client's revocation. However, these decisions are not automatic: above all, the waiver of the defense attorney must respect the right to effective judicial protection and avoid any situation of defenselessness of his client.
- When the lawyer resigns, he/she must inform both the client and the court in writing and in an irrefutable manner. In addition, he/she is obliged to continue handling the matter for a reasonable period of time, until the client appoints a new defense counsel.
- When the client revokes the defense, he/she must do so by immediately appointing another attorney to guarantee the continuity of the process. This designation is normally made through a power of attorney or "apud acta".
In both cases, the communication to the court must be done in a clear, professional and procedurally correct manner.
2. Most common causes of resignation or revocation
There is no closed list of reasons, but legal practice shows some frequent causes:
- Loss of trust: when attorney and client disagree on strategy or how to approach the defense.
- Financial problems: non-payment of fees or lack of provision of funds for the expenses of the procedure.
- Conflicts of interest: if the lawyer advises or has advised parties with conflicting interests.
- Ethical reasons or reasons of conscience: when the client requests actions contrary to the law or professional ethics.
Article 26 of the General Statute of the Spanish Bar: "Lawyers shall have full freedom to accept or reject the management of the case, as well as to waive the same (sic) at any stage of the procedure, provided that the client is not defenceless."
Article 12 of the Code of Ethics of the Spanish Bar establishes that the lawyer-client relationship must be based on mutual trust, and that freedom of defense means "the abstention or cessation of the intervention when discrepancies arise with the client, which becomes mandatory when there are circumstances that may affect their freedom and independence in the defense or advice, the preservation of professional secrecy or objectively involve a conflict of interest".
Giving up is not "giving up", but acting responsibly when the defense is no longer viable or coherent.
3. Trust, central axis of the defense
Trust is the real driver of the attorney-client relationship.
A lawyer needs to be able to act with freedom and professional honesty, and the client must feel that his or her lawyer shares his or her objective and defends his or her interests with conviction.
When that trust breaks down - whether due to strategic differences, lack of communication or personal disagreements - the defense loses effectiveness and legitimacy.
In fact, many professionals agree that a bad attorney-client relationship can be more damaging to a case than a bad trial. Hence, sometimes the resignation of counsel is a gesture of consistency and respect for the process itself.
4. The professional changeover: a delicate decision
Both for the lawyer who resigns and for the client who withdraws, the change must be managed with prudence and transparency. It is not enough to terminate the relationship: it is essential to ensure the continuity of the defenseand avoid leaks or conflicts arising from the change.
The outgoing lawyer, moreover, maintains the duty of professional secrecy about everything known during the relationship, even after having ceased his intervention. This ethical commitment is one of the greatest guarantees of the system and protects both the client and the justice system itself.
5. A question of ethics and professionalism
In recent years we have seen several media cases in which lawyers have decided to step aside from a defense at critical moments. Beyond the headlines, these decisions reflect that lawyering is not a profession of blind obedience, but of judgment and responsibility.
When a lawyer resigns, he does not run away: he defends his professional integrity and avoids compromising the quality of the defense.
In a democratic system, the lawyer not only defends his client, but also the balance of the process and respect for the right of defense. Therefore, a well-founded and correctly communicated resignation is not a sign of weakness, but of ethical strength.
6. The Ábalos case: loss of confidence and procedural strategy
In the context of the Koldo case, the resignation of José Luis Ábalos' lawyer seems to respond, according to legal and journalistic sources, to strategic differences on how to deal with the judicial investigation and its media projection. The defense of a former minister subjected to strong public exposure not only requires technical rigor, but also a communicative and tactical coordination that preserves his image and his right to the presumption of innocence.
When there is a profound discrepancy in the procedural strategy -for example, on whether or not to testify before the judge, or how to respond to the accusations of third parties-, the lawyer may consider that the minimum conditions of confidence necessary to continue no longer exist. In such a case, resignation is not only legitimate, but professionally obligatory, since persisting in a defense in which one does not believe could affect the effectiveness of the process itself.
However, other opinions have wanted to see in this resignation a strategy to delay the procedure, a strategy that has been aborted by the judge Leopoldo Puente, who has not admitted the resignation because he considered that it was formulated "in fraud of law" that is, with a false motivation and not because of the alleged "loss of confidence" because in addition the request for change of counsel was made just a few days before the date set for the statement pointing out "irreconcilable differences or irreversible deterioration of confidence" but without explaining specific details of the same.
In my opinion, and in spite of what Mr. Puente said, the statement should have been suspended so that Mr. Abalos could appoint another lawyer of his confidence, since the right of defense of the investigated parties is above the alleged speed in the investigation of the case, and furthermore, it turns out that the result of the trial may depend on the confidence with the lawyer, as we have seen. On the other hand, that the change of counsel was an instrument to delay the investigation is only a presumption of the magistrate, who cannot expect to be told what are the discrepancies in the defense, because that could mean showing the defense strategy ahead of time.
7. Final reflection: trust, ethics and transparency
The attorney-client relationship is based on a pact of trust and mutual loyalty that cannot be maintained by mere inertia. Waiver or revocation, when handled responsibly, is a mechanism to protect the right of defense itself.
The Ábalos case also shows how the public management of a resignation can influence the social perception of the process. In times when politics and justice are intertwined in public opinion, it is essential to preserve the dignity of the legal profession and professional secrecy, avoiding leaks or simplistic interpretations of decisions that, in the end, belong to the intimate sphere of the relationship between defendant and defendant.
Ultimately, a lawyer's resignation should not be seen as a desertion, but as an act of professional consistency when the ethical or strategic conditions of the defense are no longer sustainable. Because in law, as in politics, trust is everything, and thus, a lawyer who says "enough" in time does not abandon his client: he protects the essence of his profession.
