experts consulted in the frame of this project, the majority of detainees are grateful for the lawyers’ assistance, not only due to the technical assistance, legal information and counselling they provide, but also for their role in offering reassurance, as detainees see lawyers as people they can trust and with whom they will be engaging in a constant dialogue. The system is in constant evolution. Improvements have been made through the introduction of technologies that allow a better management, such as the “Online Legal Aid File: Better solutions for people’s rights”, an initiative of the General Council of the Bar Associations which was awarded the Crystal Scales of Justice Prize of the CEPEJ in 2014. This unique entry point to file applications for legal aid enables the necessary documents for filing a request for free legal aid to be collected automatically. It contributes to management reliability and transparency, minimising errors in the administrative filing and reducing the cost and the processing time. This system connects by telematic means eighty Bar Associations with relevant public institutions (tax authorities, social security, etc.). How it came about Safeguards regarding the justice system and legal aid provided for in the Spanish Constitution have to be understood within the political and social context in which the constitutional text was approved. Democracy was been restored and therefore efforts were made to incorporate international Human Rights standards into the overall national legal framework. As far as the legal aid system is concerned, a first set of reforms were undertaken to make a system that had been set up in the nineteenth century compliant with constitutional provisions. The regulation was scattered in different norms, so in 1984 a law was approved to modify the Civil Procedure Code and unify the regulation on legal aid. However, such regulation maintained the competence of judges and courts to decide on the granting of legal aid to litigators. In the 90’s, further reforms were undertaken that (i) established a unique simpler procedure for all the areas of law, regardless of the type of proceedings for which legal aid is requested (criminal, civil, labour, administrative), (ii) unified the eligibility criteria, (ii) removed the procedure to grant legal aid from the courts and turned it into a purely administrative procedure, with newly created bodies responsible for granting or denying legal aid, whose decisions can be appealed before administrative courts. This regulation dating 1996 is still in force, although it has been modified in several occasions, the latest in 2018 to transpose the Directive on legal aid. The courts, including the Constitutional Court, have played a significant role in the interpretation of the scope of the right to legal aid. These judicial interpretations have then found their way into legislation through successive reforms of the legal aid act and its implementing regulations. Other authorities have influenced changes, such as the national Ombudsperson who, for instance, filed in 2003 an appeal before the Constitutional Court against the exclusion of non-nationals from the legal aid system, as a consequence of which now every person who faces a judicial proceeding in the country, regardless of their nationality or administrative status, can apply for legal aid. Remaining challenges The Spanish legal aid system is, as explained in the previous sections, fairly consistent with the Directive on Legal Aid as well as with international standards on this matter. However, there is still room for improvement. Means test. The current thresholds above which legal aid is denied are too low, with the risk that a large portion of society be left outside the system. As of January 2023, an applicant for legal aid living in a household with four members might be denied legal aid if they have a monthly income above approximately 1.500€. For an applicant who lives alone, the threshold would go down to approximately 1.200€ per month.65 Insufficient quality controls. The current minimum requirements to join the duty scheme guarantee that lawyers who enrol in the system have experience and knowledge. However, introducing methods such as those applied in The Netherlands (peer review, supervision by mentors, etc.) would help ensure homogeneity in the quality of the service provided by legal aid lawyers. Some Spanish Bar associations already request, in order to remain in the duty scheme, that lawyers attend ongoing training. This requirement should be make compulsory for every Bar association. Insufficient public funding. In 2021, the different public administrations invested more than 284,3 million euros in legal aid,66 which represents an average investment per citizen of 6 € per year and 0,025% of Gross Domestic Product.67 However, this figures imply that only 7% of the total judicial system budget was spent on legal aid. A greater public investment effort would be necessary to ensure the sustainability of the system. Insufficient remuneration of lawyers. The system relies very much on the good will of the professionals who are part of the duty scheme. Lawyers are obliged by the legal aid norms to carry out certain tasks (for instance, representing their clients in the procedure for the enforcement of judgements) for which no remuneration is foreseen in the regulation. In addition, the allowance received per proceeding vary from one region to another, leading to significant differences on the sums perceived for performing identical tasks. In any case, the average compensation of lawyers from the duty scheme for each criminal proceeding dealt with is 147,87 €,68 which is clearly insufficient. Also, Bar associations and the General Council of the Bar associations have been instrumental in the improvement of the system, through their advocacy efforts with both regional and state authorities. for assistance in police custody and 34% of issues dealt with by lawyers from the duty scheme correspond to legal assistance to detainees (more than 658.000). 18 65. For more information, see https://www.abogacia.es/actualidad/noticias/el-iprem-sube-un-36-y-eleva-el-umbralpara-acceder-a-la-justicia-gratuita/ 66. CEPEJ Evaluation Report - 2020 evaluation cycle. 67. Within the duty scheme, the criminal jurisdiction holds a larger budget: 108,8 million euros in 2019, of which 52,7 million euros are allocated to assistance to detainees. 68. XVI Informe del Observatorio de la Justicia Gratuita, 2022. 19